Montreal wants complete ban on plastic
water bottles
Julie Masis GlobalPost
Published 8:06 A.M. ET March 14, 2016
MONTREAL, Canada — This city is gearing up for a fight against one of the most
tasteless beverages money can buy. Montreal's mayor wants to fully ban plastic-bottled
water — potentially making this the first metropolis to do so.
A pile of plastic water bottles Fayaz Kabli/Reuters
Mayor Denis Coderre made the surprise announcement in February: after Montreal’s
ban on disposable plastic bags goes into effect in 2018, the water bottle will be next.
“I raised the subject of plastic water bottles because it’s an environmental nuisance —
more than 700 million of these single-use bottles end up in Quebec’s landfills every
year,” Coderre explained in an email. “In Montreal, we are lucky to have excellent tap
water, which is tested several times per day. We tend to forget that our water is of such
good quality, that some companies even bottle it directly and then people find
themselves paying for it.”
Very few cities in the world have banned plastic water bottles. A small town in Australia
called Bundanoon (population under 3,000) was the first in the world to prohibit them
in 2009. Concord, Massachusetts, legislated a ban in 2013 — now water there is sold in
paper cartons. More recently, San Francisco and Hamburg, Germany, barred the sale of
plastic water bottles but only in city buildings.
If Montreal’s ban goes through, the city of more than 1.5 million people could become
the largest urban area to ban the bottle entirely.
The Quebec Bottled Water Association was quick to speak out against the proposal.
Bottled water recalled over E. coli concerns
“Water isn’t the only thing in plastic bottles — juice and carbonated drinks are also in
plastic bottles. Drinking water is healthy. Why ban just the water bottles?” asked
Dimitri Fraeys, the association’s vice president of innovation and economic affairs. “If I
put myself in the shoes of tourists who come to Montreal and there are no water bottles
— what will they drink?”
Rather than banning water bottles outright, he said, the city should consider
alternatives like increasing recycling.
But Nicolas Montpetit, the director of local environmental advocacy organization
Regroupement des Eco-Quartiers, said that the ban is a good idea.
“I was very pleasantly surprised [by the mayor’s announcement]. It’s definitely a step in
the right direction,” he said.
Drink up? Sorting out water truths vs. myths
Montpetit said tests have shown that tap water is often healthier than bottled water
“because you don’t know how long the water was sitting" in the bottle before you bought
it.
If you are concerned about chlorine in tap water, all you need to do is leave it in a
pitcher in the refrigerator overnight to let the chlorine evaporate, he said.
Despite the groundbreaking proposal, Manon Masse, a member of the provincial
parliament from the left-wing Quebec Solidaire party, said the mayor’s idea doesn’t go
far enough.
It would be better to implement a measure that would address the disposal of all plastic
bottles — even if they have drinks like Gatorade or Pepsi still in them, she said. One
idea might be to launch a bottle-return program that reimburses consumers not only
for metal cans, but also for plastic bottles, she said.
It will probably be a few years before the city’s water bottle ban goes into effect if it is
approved, said Geneviève Dubé, a city spokesperson.
From your smart TV being held hostage to
personalized healthcare: What to expect from
tech in 2017
By Nicole Bogart Global News
Posted December 26, 2016 9:00 am 7 min read
The internet and the gadgets it runs on were at the centre of the year’s biggest stories, most notably the U.S.
presidential election. REUTERS/Kacper Pempel/Illustration/File Photo. FILE
Technology runs the world — and 2016 was the year to prove it.
The internet and the gadgets it runs on were at the centre of several of the year’s
biggest stories, most notably the U.S. presidential election.
From Facebook’s alleged fake news problem and concerns Russian hackers may
have targeted the U.S. presidential election, technology was at the helm of
America’s political narrative.
But consumers were also subjected to an increasing amount of cyberattacks and
hacking scandals, at least one of which drew attention to the danger of webconnected home devices.
Experts warn the year ahead could be even more volatile when it comes to
cyberattacks.
Be prepared for hackers to hold your smart home for ransom
In October, popular Domain Name Server (DNS) provider Dyn was targeted with a
large-scale Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack that knocked its systems
offline and caused widespread outages for websites like Twitter, Netflix, Amazon,
Spotify and Airbnb.
The attack was a rude awakening for consumers, after it was revealed that
hackers orchestrated the take down using malware to infect “smart” devices
connected to the so-called Internet of Things.
READ MORE: How hackers may have hijacked your PVR to cripple the internet
In other words, your Wi-Fi connected coffee maker or your PVR could be used as a
“cyber weapon” by hackers.
“The bad guys realized it’s easier to enslave these devices, rather than a computer
that has anti-virus software,” explained David Masson, Canada country manager for
cyber security firm Darktrace.
“Most people don’t actually know that it’s happened. They don’t know that their
printer belongs to someone else and is carrying out an attack.”
Experts have long expressed concerns about security on the so-called “Internet of
Things” — everyday objects that connect to the internet, allowing them to send and
receive data — thanks to lax and confusing security measures on many of these
consumer devices. For example, one of the easiest ways to prevent a smart object
from being hacked is to change the administrative password. Many consumers
aren’t aware there is a password to begin with, said Masson.
He warns that attacks like the one that targeted Dyn’s network are likely to increase
over the next year. But he also cautioned that consumers may soon be targeted by
ransomware on their smart devices.
Ransomware is a type of malicious software that encrypts files on a user’s computer
and asks for money in exchange for unlocking the data.
READ MORE: Hackers disable Carleton University computer system, demand money
“Imagine you come home and your TV is hacked and you want to watch the game.
Would you pay 50 bucks to unlock it,” asked Masson.
“Let’s say you were in the car and your GPS system
got hacked — you need to know where you’re going.
Wouldn’t you think about pulling out your credit card
and paying them?”
In Masson’s words, hackers like “easy work” and a way to make a quick buck.
Darktrace research suggests more hackers are realizing they can make $50 here and
there by simply locking people out of these everyday devices.
Masson isn’t the only one worried about hackers holding smart devices
hostage. ESET senior security researcher Stephen Cobb listed the “Ransomware of
Things” (ROT) as a main concern heading into 2017.
“Terms like RoT and jackware are not intended to cause alarm. They symbolize
things that could come to pass if we do not do enough in 2017 to prevent them from
becoming a reality,” Cobb wrote in a report.
READ MORE: Did you get a new gadget from Santa? Take these steps to properly
secure it
So what can you do to help prevent hackers from targeting your smart devices? The
easiest way is to change the admin password associated with the device and make
sure it’s hard to guess (i.e. don’t just change it from “admin” to “password”).
Experts also recommend using a secure Wi-Fi connection, which means ensuring
you have a strong password on your home network and you are cautious when using
public Wi-Fi networks, which are known for having notoriously bad security. Intel
Security recommends that you come up with a secure, unique password for all of
your devices and, if possible, use any biometric security features on your device
(such as a fingerprint scanner).
More control over your healthcare
According to Telus Health, Canada’s largest health IT company, Canada’s adoption
of digital health technology has doubled since 2009, with more doctors eager to use
digital patient information in their practice.
As electronic medical records (EMRs) — a digital chart that holds all of your
healthcare history, instead of the traditional paper method — are more widely
adopted by family physicians, experts believe preventative medicine will improve.
READ MORE: Apple launches first CareKit apps to help you manage your medical
conditions
“Canada is well positioned to increase collaboration between healthcare providers to
improve patient care in 2017,” said Paul Lepage, president of Telus Health.
“By ensuring data from a patient’s EMR moves seamlessly across healthcare teams,
including doctors, pharmacists and insurance providers, healthcare professionals
can become more proactive and focus on preventative medicine, keeping patients
healthy rather than simply focusing on treatment once they are sick.”
Patient access to those EMRs has been a hot button issue in Ontario this year. In
November, health minister Eric Hoskins announced he plans to act on a
recommendation to give patients access to their electronic medical records as the
province updates the mandate of eHealth Ontario.
The Liberal government’s privatization expert recommended eHealth’s role be
refocused more on service delivery, and said patients should be able to interact with
their own personal health information.
Dr. Sam Azer, Family physician in Fort Saskatchewan, AB, says giving patients
access to their EMRs would eventually allow them to interact with their own
healthcare data.
“This will give patients more control over their health — even inputting their own
health information into their EMRs for their physicians to review,” Azer said.
More advertising… in virtual reality
If you thought today’s ads were in your face, think again.
According to Abdullah Snobar, director of the tech startup incubator DMZ at Ryerson
University, advertising in virtual reality is going to take shape in 2017.
This year it seemed the entire world became obsessed with augmented reality
smartphone game Pokemon Go (roughly three in 10 Canadian users agreed the
game was “taking over their lives,” according to an Ipsos poll conducted for Global
News in July). Snobar said the integration of ads into this type of game will be huge
next year — for example, a brand may lure players to their store, then offer a virtual
coupon from within the app.
READ MORE: This is what it’s like to experience virtual reality for the first time
But Snobar predicts brands will get even more hands on with virtual reality in order
to sell customers more products.
“Imagine you walk into a BMW dealership and you get
a headset and controllers that would allow you to test
drive a BMW in any location you desire in the world,”
he said.
“If you look at it from a real estate point of view – they can make it fun by taking
customers into a really cool office and show you a 360 virtual tour of all of these
houses in the comfort of one room. The ones you really like you can still go out and
see in person, so you still have that personal touch.”
Why all the fuss, you ask?
READ MORE: La Ronde unveils first virtual reality roller coaster in Canada
“It’s all going to be value add — what is going to make customers lives easier,” he
said.
Canadian Tire is one retailer that has already been experimenting with augmented
and virtual reality. This year the company’s spring catalogue allowed users to
download an app and use their smartphone or tablet to create a digital replica of
what was on the page, complete with more information, product reviews and links to
online shopping.
In an interview with the Financial Post, Canadian Tire president Allan
MacDonald hinted at the possibility of using virtual reality to help customers build
virtual patios in their backyards to see how Canadian Tire products might fit in with
the design.
Freedom of speech: What does it
mean and why is it important?
In this article, we discuss what freedom of speech really means, why it
matters and how it relates to censorship and cancel culture.
By Rhiannon Wardle
It is pretty widely accepted that free speech is an essential part of a
democratic society, and should be upheld to some degree. But the real
question lies in how far we take it. While some people believe that freedom of
speech should be upheld at all costs, others believe that it can be an excuse
for saying harmful things without reprimand.
In order to clarify the arguments surrounding free speech, we’ve written this
article about where it originates from, how it differs around the world, how it
benefits society, and what some of its limitations are. This is by no means a
formal guide to the laws surrounding free speech, but rather an exploration of
different perspectives around free speech.
What is the definition of free speech?
There are a number of varying definitions of free speech, but at its core, it’s
about the legal right to express or seek out ideas and opinions freely without
fear of censorship or legal action. Freedom of speech is a part of freedom of
expression, which means that individuals have the right to express themselves
in whatever way they wish.
Is free speech a human right?
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was created in 1948 by
representatives of 50 states from the United Nations. They were created in
response to the Second World War, as a way of trying to prevent such a widescale conflict from ever happening again.
Thirty human rights were created, and they were designed to belong to
everyone in the world so that no human being would be without rights. Article
18 and 19 are the rights most closely related to freedom of speech. While
article 18 states that everyone has the freedom to believe whatever they want,
and practice their beliefs (including religion), article 19 states that everyone
has the right to express their opinions freely, in whichever way they want.
These human rights then formed the basis for different human rights
laws across the world, including article 10 of the human rights act in the UK.
This article grants individuals freedom of expression without interference, but
also states that there are some conditions that may mean this freedom will be
interrogated, such as in the event of a national security risk.
Does freedom of speech mean you can say anything?
The short answer is no. The longer answer is that the specific law will depend
on the country you’re in, but generally, there will always be exceptions to the
rule. For example, in the UK’s article 10, the law states that public authorities
can restrict the right to free speech if:
•
•
•
•
•
•
They are worried about national security or public safety
They want to prevent disorder or crime
They feel it will protect health or morals
They want to protect the rights and reputations of others
They are protecting confidential information
They need to maintain the authority and impartiality of judges.
What free speech means around the world
As we previously explained, freedom of speech is a universal human right, but
different countries interpret it differently in their laws. We can get an idea about
different attitudes to free speech by looking at the citizens of different
countries, in studies such as the one done by Pew Research Centre in 2015.
In this study, the researchers surveyed respondents from 38 different countries
about their attitudes towards freedom of expression. While the U.S.
unsurprisingly came out as the most supportive of free speech, other countries
with a high level of support included Mexico, Venezuela, Canada and
Australia.
Some examples of countries with low levels of support for freedom of
expression included Senegal, Burkina Faso, Jordan, Pakistan, and Ukraine.
This research demonstrates that the principle of free speech is not a ‘one size
fits all’ concept, and depends a lot on the constitution and culture of the
country in question.
What are first amendment rights in the U.S.?
You’ve probably heard people refer to their first amendment rights in America,
since freedom of speech is often considered a fundamental part of being an
American. This law guarantees freedoms related to religion, expression,
assembly and petitioning, and allows individuals to assemble and speak freely.
The amendment actually states:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of
the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
government for a redress of grievances.”
The study we discussed earlier by Pew Research Centre demonstrated just
how much Americans care about their first amendment rights. They found that
Americans were some of the most supportive citizens of free speech, freedom
of the press, and the right to use the internet without government censorship.
In addition, they discovered that Americans were more tolerant of offensive
language than other nationalities.
However, it is interesting to consider that the U.S. is ranked at 44 out of 180
countries when ranked in the 2021 World Press Freedom Index.
Why is freedom of speech important?
There are so many reasons why freedom of speech is important. Of course,
the biggest reason is that freedom is paramount in a democracy. If we cannot
speak freely, it often means that our liberties are being restricted in some way.
However, it’s a little more complicated than that, so we took a look at our open
step about freedom of expression by Humanists UK.
One thing that’s highlighted in our open step is that all humans make mistakes,
and somehow we learn to correct them. The way that we enrich or change our
beliefs and opinions is through listening to contradictory arguments. Critical
discussion is a fundamental part of the human learning experience, and critical
discussions would not exist without people being able to express opposing
beliefs.
In this way, disagreements can be extremely productive. Also, Humanists UK
point out that causing offence is not always a bad thing. Many ideas from
history caused offence at the time, but now they are considered important and
revolutionary – take Mary Wollstonecraft and Charles Darwin, for example.
In addition, even if false arguments and bad attitudes are pushed down, they
don’t necessarily go away. Instead, they can evolve into something more
sinister, as people may only seek out those with a similar opinion to
themselves. This kind of behaviour creates an echo chamber, where you only
hear opinions that support your own, and there is no critical discourse.
Alternatively, free expression allows for ideas to be challenged, changed, and
also better understood.
What are the limits of freedom of speech?
We already discussed some of the reasons why a government might restrict
the right to freedom of expression, so we already know that it has some
limitations. Our open step from the University of Bristol explores the slightly
different limitations stated in South Africa, which restricts ‘advocacy of hatred
that is based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion’.
However, it is also worth mentioning that freedom of speech and expression
has limitations depending on the specific context you’re in. For example, even
though it is your human right to express yourself freely, doing so at work in a
way that insults or negatively affects your boss or colleagues could impact
your career. Essentially, it’s often inappropriate to speak freely if it infringes on
someone else’s freedoms.
In a similar vein, experts from the University of Oslo and the Scholars at Risk
Network explore the challenges and curbs to academic free speech which can
occur in academic environments, including those where human rights or legal
violations may not be a factor. You can find out more about this in
our Dangerous Questions: Why Academic Freedom Matters course.
Does freedom of speech apply to digital platforms?
A lot of the time, we hear about controversial opinions and statements that
people have made via the internet. This is why it’s important to evaluate the
role of digital platforms and social media in the debate on freedom of speech.
In our open step on freedom of speech and the internet, experts from the
University of Bristol discuss how the internet has been blamed by some for
enabling terrorism and extremism. This is because they are accused of
providing a platform for people to promote their damaging views, and even
plan attacks.
In this way, digital platforms very much have a part to play in the free speech
debate, as ultimately they must try to ensure that dangerous activity is not
taking place on their platforms. However, as Pier Luigi Parcu explains in
our open step on fake news, digital platforms don’t like to
assume editorial responsibility for the dangerous content that exists on their
sites.
There are rare exceptions to this, such as when Twitter banned Donald Trump
recently, but a bill was approved soon after that now prevents social media
companies from “deplatforming” politicians this way.
This general lack of assumption of responsibility means that digital platforms
don’t filter information like other media do, leaving a lot of room for fake news,
unsubstantiated opinions, and even dangerous ideas. The problem is that
filtering out this information would be an issue of freedom of expression, so it
becomes very difficult for digital platforms to find middle ground.
Lately, however, Facebook and Twitter have been trying to screen for fake
news, which is explained in more detail in this Forbes article. The writer,
Bernard Marr, states “Facebook unveiled a raft of measures designed to help
keep users safe from misinformation, as well as exploitative practices. It
deployed algorithms to look for false or sensationalist claims made in
advertising”.
Freedom of speech vs. hate speech
One of the most widely discussed critiques of unlimited free speech is that it
can condone and amplify hate speech. Hate speech can be defined as speech
that is abusive and threatening towards a certain group of people, generally
based on prejudices related to race, gender, sexuality, religion, or disability.
Some might ask, since people should be allowed to speak their minds and
voice all opinions, why can’t they simply express their dislike for certain
things? This is an argument often uttered by those in favour of complete
freedom of speech, including hate speech. However, people may disagree
with this, arguing that a clearer line should be drawn between stating dislike
and inciting violence. If nothing is off-limits, where does it end?
Can free speech ever be an excuse for racism and other forms of
discrimination?
In our open step about freedom of expression by Humanists UK, they discuss
the difficulty in deciding what counts as offensive and what doesn’t. They ask,
‘if we ban all speech that anyone might consider offensive, how much
conversation would be left?’ While it is true that offence is subjective, and
depends hugely on your individual perspective, it could be argued that we
have a duty to protect people against threats of harm and violence.
Even though a certain statement doesn’t offend you, it might still be offensive.
In an open step by the European University Institute, Pier Luigi Parcu talks
about the issue of hate speech online, saying “hate speech has become a
common pattern of political propaganda, even in established democracies,
targeting minorities, women, migrants, weaker elements of society, or simply
the diversity of opinions. The phenomenon has been exacerbated by the
relative anonymity that is allowed to the haters by the Internet.”
Does censorship violate freedom of speech?
Censorship is often talked about in relation to free speech because people feel
that they are being unfairly censored online in violation of their rights.
Censorship can be defined as the suppression of information, though it often
relates to things like images, books, television, and other media.
It can be argued that some forms of censorship are necessary – for example,
websites that children regularly access might censor inappropriate images.
However, the rules around censorship can be very hazy online, and
censorship can even become oppressive in many circumstances. We go into
more detail below.
The dangers of censorship
In our open step about censorship from the University of York, experts suggest
that internet censorship is a direct threat to our freedom to access information
and express ourselves. They state that the key issue is that there is no clear
code of conduct on many digital platforms, meaning we rarely even know what
they are restricting and blocking, or why.
Take the case of model, Nyome Nicholas-Williams, on Instagram last year. A
partially nude, non-explicit image of her that didn’t break any Instagram
guidelines was repeatedly taken down. However, it is extremely easy to
stumble across explicit nude images on Instagram, so we have to ask – why
was Nyome censored?
The problem is, that platforms like Instagram operate on a case-by-case basis
when it comes to nudity, leaving a lot of room for bias, discrimination, and
unfair censorship.
On a different note entirely, we all know that censorship of information by the
government can be extremely dangerous and damaging. Extreme censorship
is often a feature of dictatorship – citizens are not given access to news,
books, certain information, and instead are fed propaganda. This is a direct
violation of their human rights.
Is cancel culture a form of censorship?
A very common societal phenomenon right now is cancel culture. Placing
limitations on free speech via social or digital ostracisation is not a direct attack
like censorship by the government or social media platforms, but can be an
effective way of deplatforming an individual, group or corporation.
Rather than actually stopping someone from expressing their views, cancel
culture is a way for people to say that they’re not going to listen. Usually,
cancel culture is a response to someone saying or doing something
objectionable. It normally involves members of the public withdrawing their
support from the cancelled person, but it can also involve trying to negatively
impact the person’s career prospects.
For the reasons we’ve already discussed, it can be damaging to cancel
people, because this means we are refusing to engage with them and create
critical discourse. However, this really depends on the reasons why someone
is being cancelled.
The important thing to remember is that asking someone to be accountable for
their actions is not regarded as the same as cancel culture. A widely
acknowledged view is that criticism of cancel culture should not be an excuse
for not taking responsibility for damaging actions, just as the right to free
speech should not be an excuse for spreading hatred.
Final thoughts
Hopefully, this has provided you with an interesting and informative overview
of free speech. If you’re interested in learning more about political ideas
surrounding democracy, you can try our Introduction to Politics ExpertTrack by
the University of Kent.
While freedom of speech is an essential part of the world we live in and a
fundamental human right, it can still be useful to think about its limitations.
Being able to question society is a positive feature of democracy, and we
believe that developing curiosity is an essential part of the human learning
experience.
What is globalisation and how does
it impact us?
We dive into the concept of globalisation, exploring its history, as well as
what the benefits and challenges are of globalisation for our society and
planet.
Globalisation has defined almost every aspect of our society’s growth over the
past 100 years. We’ve got globalisation to thank for the availability of everyday
items like avocados (cultural globalisation), annual events like Black Friday
(globalisation of traditions), and even international cinema on Netflix (digital
globalisation) – but what is globalisation? How does it impact our lives, and
why is it so important?
We explore all of these questions and more, covering everything from the
history of globalisation to the anti-globalisation movement. By the end of this
article, you’ll know exactly how globalisation is influencing the world around us
and why learning about globalisation is vital for anyone engaging with the
modern world of business, culture, finance, politics, and economics.
What is globalisation?
By definition, globalisation is:
the process by which businesses or other organisations develop
international influence or start operating on an international scale.
In simple terms, globalisation is the catch-all term for the process by which
items and people move across borders. From goods and services to money
and technology, globalisation promotes and speeds up how we move and
exchange things across the world.
To learn more, check out our course on globalisation and health inequities.
What is the history of globalisation?
From ancient trade routes to the formation of international organisations, the
exchange of ideas and trade has, in one way or another, existed as long as us.
There is some debate about what stage in history we should call the beginning
of globalisation. Some believe that globalisation has been around since human
migratory routes were formed (as early as the 1st century BC). Certainly,
humans have been trading goods forever, but when it comes to moving goods
across borders, the creation of the Silk Road is widely acknowledged to be
one of the earliest large-scale examples of globalisation.
The Silk Road was a trade route between China and Europe which saw
Chinese goods being sold in Europe for the first time. From spices to silk, early
global trade routes thrived over land and sea into the 14th century, but it was
at the end of the 15th century when global trade truly took off in the Age of
Discovery.
During this time, European explorers linked the East and West and discovered
the Americas, and now common-place foods like potatoes, tomatoes, coffee,
and chocolate became available in Europe.
Whilst these early examples certainly introduced the world to global trade, it is
the Industrial Revolution that historians truly regard as the beginning of
globalisation as we know it today.
The Industrial Revolution and Globalisation
Steamships and trains made the trading of goods faster, and technological
advancements meant during the Industrial Revolution, Britain were making
textile, iron and manufactured goods that were in-demand all over the world.
After the World Wars, many countries wanted to remove long standing trade
barriers and encourage free trade, as well as set up global organisations.
Today, technology and economic policy has further reduced the barriers
permitting the free flow of goods, services, and capital. You can learn more
about the changes in the meaning of the term ‘globalisation’ throughout history
in our course on how politics works from the University of Kent.
What are the different types of globalisation?
Despite the common understanding of globalisation as a solely economic or
financial concept, globalisation relates to our lives in a wide variety of ways.
Ideas and traditions from around the world are traded as cultural globalisation,
and we fly from country to country freely due to geographical globalisation.
Examples of Globalisation
Globalisation is more than just the global exchange of money, technology and
goods. Below are some examples of different types of globalisation.
Economic globalisation
The ongoing development of processes, seizing of opportunities, and solving
of the challenges of economic activity around the world. Examples include the
spread of capitalism, an increase in market trading and exports, and the
forming of global economic policies.
Cultural globalisation
The sharing and trading of cultural beliefs, traditions, and ideas. Examples of
this include the rise of K-Pop (Korean pop music).
Digital globalisation
The sharing of data and information on digital platforms that speeds up and
improves how we connect to people around the world. Examples include big
tech platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube.
Financial globalisation
The rise in global financial systems and the exchanging of money globally.
Examples include the global stock market, which relies on the economy as a
whole and where a decline in one market has a knock-on effect on others.
Geographic globalisation
The ever-changing organisation of different regions and countries around the
world. Examples include the sharing of visas between certain countries which
enable people to work, live, and travel easily in countries other than their own.
Political globalisation
The development and influence of international organisations which decide on
actions and laws at an international level. Examples of such organisations
include the European Union, the UN, and even the World Health
Organisation.
Ecological globalisation
Refers to the growing movement towards seeing the Earth (and its upkeep) as
a single entity of which we must all be responsible. Examples include the
COP26 summit which saw countries from around the world come together to
tackle climate change as one global team.
Why is globalisation important?
As we’ve covered, globalisation is inevitable in our increasingly connected
world. If we want to make the most of global resources by sharing wealth,
ideas, and knowledge, then globalisation is key.
Globalisation allows us to trade freely and work together as one planet.
Whether it’s large corporations boosting local economies overseas
by investing in resources and products or countries agreeing to work together
against climate change in the Paris Agreement, globalisation enables us to
work together for the greater good.
To go into more detail, check some opinions on globalisation, and our course
from the University of Bristol on global citizenship.
The benefits of globalisation
Globalisation has far-ranging benefits in many industries and areas. Some of
these benefits include:
Economic and financial benefits
The most visible benefits of globalisation are arguably economic and financial.
Simply put, globalisation has lifted many countries out of poverty by sharply
increasing trade, economic, and financial exchanges.
In turn, this has led to strong global economic growth and contributed to the
acceleration of the industrial development that has given us the advanced
technologies and commodities we now can’t imagine living without.
Similarly, the simplification of global financial regulations has made it easier for
the world’s key financial players to exchange capital. This has led to a healthy,
global financial market with international contracts and exchanges at a
consistently high level.
Cultural benefits
Aside from economics and finance, globalisation has seen the movement of
people across borders increase exponentially. We now think nothing of flying
across the world for business or pleasure. Be it migration, expatriation, or
travelling, the intermingling of people from across our planet has undoubtedly
led to hugely important exchanges of culture.
This international tourism can help local economies, improve job prospects for
individuals, and create all kinds of opportunities to explore the world.
As well as new customs, clothing, beliefs, and perspectives, with new people
comes new tastes. Food like coffee, avocados, and bananas are now
consumed all over the world, despite being native to tropical temperatures.
Additionally, cultural exchange in the forms of books, television, and film has
been accelerated with the technological advancements of the 21st century.
The internet is connecting us in a way we’ve never seen before. In 2021,
someone in the US can load the latest episode of an Icelandic television
programme minutes after it airs, without having to leave their home.
The negative impact of globalisation
Whilst the benefits of globalisation are plain to see, with great power, comes
great responsibility. Globalisation is complex, and its influence on our world
isn’t always positive.
Why is globalisation bad?
While the economic impact of globalisation can be seen as a benefit for all,
many argue that it operates in the interests of the world’s richest countries.
Income inequality, trade that benefits parties disproportionately, and the
unequal distribution of wealth, are just a few of the criticisms against some of
the countries leading the way in globalisation.
The inequality gap is exemplified by Oxfam’s recent study, which found that
the world’s richest 1% have over twice as much wealth as the other 6.9 billion
people on earth. So while globalisation increases our collective global wealth,
many argue that most of the shared profits are fed back into the pockets of
those who already have the most.
Environmental challenges of globalisation
The aforementioned opening up of the world by air and sea, whilst enabling us
to gain new perspectives and explore new cultures, has had an undoubtedly
negative impact on our planet. The emissions created by travel have
contributed to global warming, an increase in greenhouse gases, and high
levels of air pollution.
While globalisation has accelerated industrial production, the consequences
on the environment are plain to see. Deforestation and the depletion of natural
resources has had huge consequences for global ecosystems and
biodiversity. The production of single-use materials like plastic has also
contributed to problems with waste disposal and increased pollution around
the world.
Globalisation also leads to a redistribution of jobs and commerce. For
example, the UK was once a steel producing powerhouse. This fueled the
national economy, providing jobs for thousands of people. Globalisation has
led to UK manufacturers shutting down, as they are unable to compete with
the low priced steel provided by China. This leads to job losses in the UK and
raises questions over the regulations and low wages being offered to workers
in China.
As well as the sustainable and economic challenges, many argue that cultural
globalisation will lead to the forming of a homogenous ‘super-culture’. Without
unique cultural attributes that define nations, could some valuable parts of
global culture be lost forever?
GreenRoots: Water vs Oil - Which One Will Be
More Important?
by Asinus Asinum Fricat
Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)
Friday, July 24, 2009 at 3:58:48a IST
As a former chef I know too well the importance of fresh, clean water:
no water, no food, no life. Water is far more vital for human life than oil
as environmentalists, corporations and governments increasingly
recognize its unequal distribution around the globe. A severe shortage
will lead to concomitant environmental degradation and intense
conflicts in the years ahead. Clean drinking water and free access to it
will be as important in global geopolitics and economics in the years
ahead as oil was in the post war period.
I have observed first hand the gradual soil erosion and the
accompanying decimation of cattle in some parts of Australia during the
great drought of the seventies and it is no accident that I chose to live in
Ireland, a country blessed by generous rainfalls.
Less than 3 percent of the world’s water is potable and climate change is
already rapidly diminishing the vast stores of freshwater stored in
glaciers and polar ice. As a result vultures venture capitalists are starting
to take note since water’s hot-commodity status has snared the
attention of General Electric among a host of others, like Frenchowned Suez and Aqua America, the largest US-based private water
company.
Here is further food for thought: The Water Lords.
There are over ten major corporate players now delivering freshwater
services for profit. The two biggest are both from France Vivendi
Universal and Suez, considered to be the General Motors and Ford of
the global water industry. Between them, they deliver private water
and wastewater services to more than 200 million customers in 150
countries and are in a race, along with others such as Bouygues Saur,
RWE-Thames Water and Bechtel-United Utilities, to expand to every
corner of the globe. In the United States, Vivendi operates through its
subsidiary, USFilter; Suez via its subsidiary, United Water; and RWE by
way of American Water Works.
They are aided by the World Bank and the IMF, which are increasingly
forcing Third World countries to abandon their public water delivery
systems and contract with the water giants in order to be eligible for
debt relief. The performance of these companies in Europe and the
developing world has been well documented: huge profits, higher
prices for water, cutoffs to Customers who cannot pay, no
transparency in their dealings, reduced water quality, bribery and
corruption.
Water for profit takes a number of other forms. The bottled-water (my
personal pet hate: over $100 billion is spent annually on bottled
water, but it would cost only $30 billion to provide clean drinking
water to the entire world) industry is one of the fastest-growing and
least regulated industries in the world, expanding at an annual rate of
20 percent. Bottled-water companies like Nestlé, Coca-Cola and Pepsi
are engaged in a constant search for new water supplies to feed the
insatiable appetite of this business. In rural communities all over the
world, corporate interests are buying up farmlands, indigenous lands,
wilderness tracts and whole water systems, then moving on when
sources are depleted. Fierce disputes are being waged in many places
over these "water takings," especially in the developing world.
California illustrates this hot issue right now: most of its rain comes in
the winter months and not much in the summer when agriculture and
people need it most. The vast majority falls in northern California's
National Forests, yet the greatest demand is in southern part of the
state. That's the main problem California faces today as water
privatization is becoming increasingly politicized, and expensive.
The folks at Public Citizen share my view:
A worldwide crisis over water is brewing. According to the United
Nations, 31 countries are now facing water scarcity and 1 billion
people lack access clean drinking water. Water consumption is
doubling every 20 years and yet at the same time, water sources are
rapidly being polluted, depleted, diverted and exploited by corporate
interests ranging from industrial agriculture and manufacturing to
electricity production and mining. The World Bank predicts that by
2025, two-thirds of the world's population will suffer from lack of clean
and safe drinking water.
However the bigger picture tells us that the population of the world
is exploding. According to the World Bank, eight out of ten children born
in the next 20 years will be born in the developing world and of these,
88 per cent will live most of their lives in a huge megalopolis such as
Mexico City, Lagos or Delhi. These cities will require fresh water. And
food.
To be able to feed this population will demand that land across the
globe is irrigated more intensely. As things stand right now irrigation is
highly inefficient as it absorbs 70 per cent of the world’s water supply.
Where is that water going to come from? I don't have the answers, all I
know is that if politicians world-wide don't hurry with legislating
renewable energy policies, agricultural changes and water conservation
& replenishment among others, then we're in deep doo-doo.
Before I move on to some pertinent water news, I have collected these
links which can address how to save water via rain barrels, how to use
reverse osmosis membranes, and how you can collect water with this
clever gizmo.
First, this link will provide you with tons of other links to reverse
osmosis products. Note that I have no interest in any of these
companies, I'm merely linking for those who don't have the time to do
so.
How to build a water collector: Source
This energy-saving solar hot water system lets your electric or gas
hot water heater: Source
How to Build a Rain Water Collector: Source
Building a Desert Rainwater Garden: Source
Solar water desalination and purification: Source
And finally, measure your water footprint here.
Earth's Most Prominent Rainfall Feature Creeping Northward:
Associate Professor Julian Sachs and colleagues at the University of
Washington in Seattle, Washington State, found that a rain band near
the equator that determines the supply of freshwater to nearly a billion
people has been moving north for more than 300 years. Source
Court Ruling Puts U.S. Waters At Risk:
The Supreme Court has made it necessary for Congress and the Obama
administration to protect America's lakes from mining wastes. Last
month, the court ruled that a mining company can fill an Alaskan lake
with chemically treated mine waste, killing virtually all life forms. Now,
all U.S. lakes are vulnerable. The EPA should immediately rescind a Bush
administration memo and rule that redefined toxic mining wastes as "fill
material." Congress should pass the Clean Water Protection Act, which
would make this change permanent and prevent mines and other
industries from using our rivers, lakes and streams as cheap dumping
grounds. Source
Not Great News as 60% of Chilean Soil is Eroded:
Loss of agricultural topsoil due to erosion is a major problem in 60% of
Chile, reported Rodrigo Alvarez, director of the Center for Information
on Natural Resources (CIREN) in Santiago. Source (in Spanish)
Lack of Snowy flows called 'tragic':
Manager Juliette Le Feuvre of Environment Victoria's Healthy Rivers
Campaign expressed the group's disappointment with a seven-year-old
plan to recharge the Snowy River in New South Wales, Australia. I know
this river well, having paddled there in the seventies. Source
Fluorine in the aquifer, not in the taps, in Italy:
Worries about the quality of drinking water in Treviglio, Bergamo
Province, Italy increased after the the Regional Environmental
Protection Agency (ARPA) found levels of fluorine above the legal
limit. Source (in Italian)
About effing time:
The American Water Works Association (AWWA) today urged members
of Congress to create a federal water infrastructure bank to help
America invest in its aging water systems. Source
Some results:
American Rivers applauded Representative Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) for
introducing legislation that establishes a Water Trust Fund to invest in
fixing the nation's outdated drinking water and sewage treatment
systems. Source
BPA raises its ugly head again:
Safety fears over controversial chemical bisphenol A (BPA) and
environmental concerns have prompted one US beverage company to
start selling water in cartons. O.N.E World Enterprises has announced
the launch of O.N.E Water in a BPA-free Tetra Pak carton as a
“sustainable alternative to plastic bottled water.” Source
Desalinations News:
Nuno Oscar Branco, an industry analyst, who has been researching the
desalination market, said: "Spain is the largest desalination market in
the Mediterranean region, but countries such as Algeria, Morocco or
Libya, to name just a few, have joined the desalination bandwagon and
are investing heavily on this source of fresh drinking water." Source
A ton of useful links here from UNESCO.
Seriously Good News Here: Drinking Water From Air
Humidity. Source
IMPACT OF MIGRATION ON POPULATION CHANGE
Results from the ESPON DEMIFER Project
Contrary to the past, natural population development will have only limited impact on population change. Today,
the most important force behind European population change is international migration, but the impact of internal
migration is also considerable. Three quarters of all regions will have a larger population in 2050 if current
migration flows continue than if there were no migration. To explore the impact of migration on population change
the ESPON project DEMIFER (Demographic and Migratory flows Affecting European Regions and Cities) has
analysed the change in population in 2050 based on a Status Quo Scenario and a No Migration Scenario as well
as a No-Extra-Europe Migration Scenario.
Map 1: Impact of Migration on Population in 2050 - Calculated as the difference in population between the
Status Quo and No Migration scenarios in % of the population in the No Migration scenario.
Reyk!javik
Canarias
!
-60.0 – -30.0
-30.0 – -10.0
-10.0 – 0.0
0.0 – 10.0
10.0 – 30.0
30.0 – 107.0
no data
!
Guadeloupe Martinique
!
!
Réunion
Hels
inki
!
Tal!linn
Os! lo
Stock!holm
Guyane
!
Ri!ga
Madeira
!
Købe!nhavn
Viln!ius
Min! sk
Du!blin
Acores
!
Wars!zawa
Be!rlin
Amste! rdam
Ky! iv
Lon!don
Bruxelles!/Brussel
This map does not
necessarily reflect the
opinion of the ESPON
Monitoring Committee
Pra!ha
Luxem!bourg
Pa!ris
Kish!inev
Wien
!
●
Buda!pest
Vad! uz
Bern
●
●
Zag!reb
Bucuresti!
Be ogr ad
!
Sara!jevo
So!fiya
Podg!orica Skopje
A n k a ra
!
●
Ro!ma
Tir a na
!
Ma!drid
Lis!boa
Ath!inai
Nic!osia
El-Ja!zair
Tounis
!
!
Valletta
© Central European Forum for Migration and Population Research, IOM, DEMIFER, 2010
EUROPEAN UNION
Part-financed by the European Regional Development Fund
INVESTING IN YOUR FUTURE
0
250
500
km
Source: ESPON 2013 Database 2010
Origin of data: Eurostat, NSIs, MIMOSA, ESTAT, Estimations, 2009-2010
Mismatch to NSI data possible
© EuroGeographics Association for administrative boundaries
AIM OF THE DEMIFER PROJECT
The aim of the DEMIFER project is to assess future
changes in population growth, the size of the labour
force and the ageing of the population, and to explore
different policy options aiming at regional
competitiveness and territorial cohesion. Assessing
the impact of intra-Europe and extra-Europe migration
on population dynamics was one of the main tasks in
this endeavour.
ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF MIGRATION ON
POPULATION
To analyse the impact of migration on the population
and labour force at regional level in the ESPON area in
the period 2005-2050, the DEMIFER team calculated
three reference scenarios. The first one (Status Quo)
is a simulation of what would happen if the
demographic regimes of mid-decade (2005)
continued unchanged until 2050. In the other two
scenarios all or some migration streams are blocked:
in the No Migration scenario, population of the regions
changes due to births and deaths only, while in the No
Extra-Europe Migration scenario it changes also due
to internal and international intra-ESPON space
migration, but no extra-European migration. A
comparison of the results of the three simulations
yields estimates of the impact of migration on
population change. The simulations were prepared
with the MULTIPOLES population dynamics model.
KEY FINDINGS WITH REGARD TO MIGRATION
 Migration, both extra-Europe and intra-Europe, will
have a significant impact on demographic and labour
force development of regions.
 Migration will benefit the already affluent regions,
whereas poorer regions will lose population due to
migration. Similarly, migration will reduce ageing in
affluent regions and increase it in poor ones.
 Most countries and regions experiencing population
decrease do so mainly due to natural change (the
difference between births and deaths), while regions
which gain population do so mainly due to extraEurope migration.
forming a broad Mediterranean crescent, and in east
and south- west England. They will be “financed” from
three sources: extra-Europe migration, international
intra-Europe migration and internal migration. The
European regions which would pay for these gains are
located in the East, especially in Romania and
southern Poland. Internal migration also plays a role
and would fuel for example the increase of Bucharest,
Mazowsze and the hinterland of Prague. In Paris, on
the other hand, large internal outmigration is
responsible for the negative population balance.
Overall, the divide goes along the wealth and
accessibility lines: affluent regions, including large
agglomerations in Central and Eastern Europe would
gain on migration whereas far away and poor regions
would lose. Keeping in mind that migration is a
powerful component of population dynamics, we
should be aware of general consequences of
migration, namely two interlinked processes: (i)
regional and in some cases even national
depopulation in areas most negatively affected by
migration, and (ii) concentration of population in the
regions offering a combination of accessibility,
affluence and nice climate. Far going decreases of
population cannot be isolated from regional economic
development.
TERRITORIAL PATTERNS OF MIGRATION
Urban regions often face a negative internal migration
balance as a result of migration to settlements outside
the urban areas. At the same time, urban regions
usually attract international migrants because of the
availability of cheap housing and jobs and the
presence of a resident migrant population. In more
attractive regions the available housing tends to be
occupied primarily by internal migrants, restricting the
possibilities for international migrants to settle in these
regions. Urban regions, especially those that
encompass big cities, also often attract young
populations (students, young active and foreign
immigrants) and expel older active ones, such as inner
London. On the other hand, there are also regions that
either attract both young and older migrants (e.g.
various regions in Spain) or expel both (e.g. various
regions in Poland).
REGIONAL IMPACTS OF MIGRATION
TYPES OF MIGRATION STREAMS
The overall impact of migration streams on regional
populations is illustrated on Map 1, which presents the
differences between 2050 populations in the Status
Quo and No Migration scenario, scaled to the latter.
Over 75 % of the regions are gainers. In 24 % of the
regions, 2050 population would be higher by 30 % or
more compared to the No Migration scenario. In the
EU15 almost all regions, except those in north-eastern
France, north Portugal, north-eastern Finland and
some regions in the former East Germany profit from
migration. The most profound gains would take place
in Italy north of Naples, south-western France, some
south-western regions of Spain and in Algarve, all
In 32 % of regions intra-Europe migration has a larger
impact on population change than extra-Europe
migration. This is true in particular in the regions of
Bulgaria, Poland, Romania and Slovakia, where
population decreases significantly through intraEurope migration. In the majority of regions in Western
Europe, extra-Europe migration is more significant
than intra-Europe migration and is the factor
thatreduces population decline or even causes an
increase.In some regions, especially in Italy, but also
in Algarve and Inner London, without extra-European
migration the population in 2050 would be almost one
third smaller.
MIGRATION AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS
As most migrants are in the young adult age group, in
general their emigration raises the dependency ratios
as it reduces the number of the working age
population. Emigration will for instance raise the veryold-age dependency ratio. This dependency measure
is defined as the ratio of the population aged 75 and
more to the total economically active population and
can be interpreted as the burden of the potential longterm care need on the working population. At the
same time, in the regions attracting migrants,
newcomers increase the younger and more
economically active population, reducing the
proportion of the very old.
One of the controversial topics in research and in
public debate is the assessment of the impact of extraEurope migration on population development. The
first observation based on the model results is that
most of the European regions gain population due to
extra-European migration. This is not the case in 11 %
of regions, mostly located in the 12 new EU Member
States, especially the Czech Republic, Romania
and Bulgaria. In some regions, in particular in Italy,
but also in Algarve and Inner London, extra-Europe
migration would generate populations larger by over
40 % than in the scenario with no extra-Europe
migration. Extra-Europe migration would also
substantially reduce the value of the old-age
dependency ratios in all regions. In some Italian and
Spanish regions this reduction exceeds 40%.
Extra-European migration would enhance regional
labour force in 90 % of investigated regions. However
in the Baltic States, Cyprus and regions in the Czech
Republic, Romania and Bulgaria extra-Europe
migration would mainly cause a moderate reduction in
the labour force. In all European regions, the labour
market dependency ratios (LMDR; defined as the
ratio of the whole economically inactive population to
the whole active population) will be smaller due to
extra-Europe migration. In Austria and Switzerland
and a large part of the UK and Italy the difference
would be 10 - 20 % and therefore very significant.
Therefore extra-European migration would have a
beneficial, albeit unequal impact on the balance
between the labour force and economically inactive
population.
In general our research shows that migration,
both extra-Europe and migration in general, would
have a significant impact on demographic and labour
force development of regions. Importantly, it would
benefit most affluent regions, whereas poor regions
would lose population due to migration. Similarly,
migration would reduce ageing in affluent regions and
increase in poor ones. Therefore we may expect that
migration would be a strong factor increasing regional
disparities. This is the aspect of regional policies
which is not disputed much yet, but perhaps quite
crucial for future regional developments. To prevent
the growth of regional disparities it is important to
stimulate policies reducing incentives to emigrate
from poor to wealthy regions and policies allowing
poor regions to attract more extra-European migrants.
While immigration can only partly compensate the
impacts of ageing and low fertility, it may be an
important force for territorial cohesion. At the same
time e x t r a - Eur op e a n m i gr a t io n must be
complemented by integration policies to avoid further
labour market segmentation. Changing attitudes
towards migration from being a burden to a benefit of
the European territory is an important part of this. Thus
migration policies will only be successful if they are
combined with policies to promote territorial cohesion
in other areas as well, such as integration, education,
housing and labour market policies. In the light of
demographic and labour market challenges,
increasing the attractiveness of regions falling behind
and losing population may be just as important as
boosting the competitiveness of already vibrant
regions that benefit from migration.
MORE INFORMATION
One of the major priorities of the ESPON 2013 Programme is to observe demographic trends in Europe, to look into future demographic
developments and to link these to economic, social and environmental development issues in European regions and cities. Within this
Programme, ESPON initiated and funded the DEMIFER research project running from 2008-2010. The DEMIFER project was carried out by a
team of researchers from the Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute (NIDI, Netherlands, Lead Partner), the University of Vienna
(Austria), the International Organization for Migration/Central European Forum for Migration and Population Research (IOM/CEFMR,
Poland), School of Geography of the University of Leeds (United Kingdom), the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL,
Netherlands), the Nordic Centre for Spatial Development (Nordregio, Sweden), and the Institute for Research on Population and Social
Policies, National Research Council (CNR, Italy). The impact of migration study were prepared by IOM/CEFMR. Please note that migration
data is from MIMOSA-ESTAT and might mismatch with NSI statistics. More information: Beer@nidi.nl (project in general) and
d.kupisz@twarda.pan.pl / m.kupisz@twarda.pan.pl (migration)
The ESPON 2013 Programme is part-financed by the European Regional Development Fund, the EU Member States and the Partner States
Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland. It shall support policy development in relation to the aim of territorial cohesion and a
harmonious development of the European territory. ESPON shall support Cohesion Policy development with European wide, comparable
information, evidence, analyses and scenarios on framework conditions for the development of regions, cities and larger territories. In doing
so, it shall facilitate the mobilisation of territorial capital and development opportunities, contributing to improving European competitiveness,
to the widening and deepening of European territorial cooperation and to a sustainable and balanced development.
The Managing Authority responsible for the ESPON 2013 Programme is the Ministry of Sustainable Development and Infrastructures,
Department for Spatial Planning and Development of Luxembourg. More information: www.espon.eu www.espon.eu
Texts and maps stemming from research projects under the ESPON Programme presented in this report do not necessarily reflect the opinion
of the ESPON Monitoring Committee
EUROPEAN UNION
Part-financed by the European Regional Development Fund
INVESTING IN YOUR FUTURE
Is Water In Mexico Safe To Drink?
Tourists Told To Drink Up In
Mexico City
Susmita Baral / Published Jan 27 2014, 4:10 PM EST
Is Mexico's Tap Water Safe? GYVAFOTO/SHUTTERSTOCK
Mexico City is giving its residents and tourists a message, and they're selling it
hard: "Drink the water." People have long been avoiding the tap water of
Mexico City, as it has a notorious reputation of having low quality. In fact,
Mexicans are so accustomed to drinking bottled water that they're the world’s
largest per capita consumer at 61.8 gallons per person each year, according to
Beverage Marketing Corp. The skepticism and fear of the consumers is not
unwarranted, as Mexico City's 8.1-magnitude earthquake in 1985 left many
water pipelines and sewers burst. This resulted in an increase in waterborne
diseases and the spread of cholera in the 1990s. But a new law has changed
things in Mexico City, as it mandates that restaurants install filters to provide
customers with safe water.
"We need to create a culture of water consumption," said Dr. Jose Armando
Ahued, health secretary for Mexico City, according to the Huffington Post.
"We need to accept our water." The new law, state Mexico City officials, give
65,000 restaurants six months to implement filters after the bill is signed this
month. In accordance with the law, which does not apply to the food stalls on
the streets, health inspectors can fine restaurants anywhere from $125 to $630
for not complying with the law. Mexico City's health secretary, reports
the Associated Press, claims that 95 percent of the city's drinking water is
clean and undergoes daily chlorination checks. That said, experts and critics
point out that the clean water still travels through old underground pipes that
can contaminate the water by the time it reaches consumers.
Mexico's bottle water habit is one that comes with two problems: It's
expensive and destroys the environment. In a nation where the minimum wage
per day is $5, purchasing one-liter water bottles for 50 cents--one-liter bottles
can be as expensive as one dollar--is not a small cost to burden. What's more,
with each Mexican using 127 gallons of bottled water a year, as discovered
from a study by the Inter-American Development Bank, disposal becomes a
problem as well. Not only does bottled water waste fossil fuels in production
and transport, but it also ends up in landfills, lakes, and oceans instead of being
recycled. And since plastic is not biodegradable -- the particles never fully
disappear, they simply get smaller -- it adversely affects our environment.
And while it may seem as if a high bottled water consumption equates to a
healthy lifestyle, the truth is far from that, as Mexico also has a significant
soda intake. The nation consumes the most soda per capita than any other
country in the world and in turn, the government has implemented a onepeso-per-liter tax on soda. The country's need to up their water intake and
decrease their soda intake has less to do with the environmental impacts of
bottled water and more to do with its obesity rate. Last year, Mexico overtook
the United States as the fattest country with a 32.8 percent adult obesity rate
according to findings by the United Nations Food and Agricultural
Organization.
Learn tech and
adapt in digital era
There's still a role for man in a future with machines, but he must learn
to work with them
ALVIN NG
May 03, 2017 06:00 AM
There is plenty of talk about the potential mass displacement of jobs to automation
and technology in the digital future.
Clearly, the world is experiencing unprecedented change which is touching every
aspect of industry - from how products are made, to how people are managed and how
business is conducted.
Breakthroughs in artificial intelligence (AI), automation, robotics, autonomous vehicles
and the Internet of Things (IoT) are causing disruption at an unprecedented intensity,
transforming the way we live, work and interact.
A McKinsey Global Institute report indicates that less than 5 per cent of occupations
can be completely automated using current technologies.
However, almost every occupation has the potential for partial automation, including
middle-skill and high-skill jobs.
Some jobs in finance, law and healthcare are also not immune.
It is against this backdrop of rapid technological progression and shifts in geopolitical,
socio-economic and demographic factors, that the Committee on the Future Economy
has proposed its economic strategies for the next decade.
In the digital future where new jobs are likely to emerge as fast as others get displaced,
some industries are more vulnerable to disruption, with some going as far as to say
that the end is near for blue-collar workers.
Given that the most in-demand skills today did not exist like even 10 years ago, what
can we do to stay competitive and relevant in the digital future?
History has shown that with technological advances come fresh opportunities.
According to the World Economic Forum's Future of Jobs report, technological
advances and other socio-economic factors will create 2.1 million new jobs by 2020.
Technology such as AI, robotics, IoT, cloud computing, big data analytics and seamless
collaboration is driving companies to reimagine their businesses for the digital age.
Coupled with the pressures of changing trends in consumer expectations such as
instant gratification, mass customisation and miniaturisation, businesses must adapt
or risk obsolescence in the digital future.
As firms undergo revamps to transform into enterprises of the future, new ecosystems
and new jobs will emerge, and the skills that employers need from workers will change.
New jobs requiring different skills will emerge, and workers will
perform work that complements machines, and vice versa.
Take manufacturing jobs for instance. With the industry becoming more high-tech,
workers with advanced skill sets in robotics, automation and data science are needed
to manage complex systems and data on the production floor.
As automation and machines become more pervasive, there will be increased
collaboration between people and machines on complex tasks.
New jobs requiring different skills will emerge, and workers will perform work that
complements machines, and vice versa.
As jobs evolve into on-demand and project-based activities, the traditional concept of a
job will be eroded.
To compete in the knowledge-based economy of the future, the modern workplace will
need workers who can find unprecedented ways of combining machine learning,
business and technology skills to achieve higher productivity.
FACTORIES OF THE FUTURE
Leading manufacturers are recognising the need to incorporate increasing levels of
digital manufacturing into their factories due to changing consumer trends, shrinking
product life cycles and technological innovations.
By integrating an automated factory, labour costs and labour scarcity can be optimised
while consistency, quality and flexibility can be enhanced.
However, even as manufacturing incorporates more automation, people and intellect
remain key parts of manufacturing.
Machines are learning to accomplish human processes while human capabilities and
skills are being harnessed at a higher value, leading to better outcomes, new
opportunities and continuous innovation.
In the Factory of the Future, people and machines will work collaboratively to optimise
manufacturing processes and output, to deliver outcomes that neither can produce
alone.
At the end, people will be vital to the productivity, efficiency and success of all digitised
operations in the future.
Employers will need to support and train their employees to thrive in a data-centric
environment where human-machine collaboration is critical in daily operations.
Leading companies will be those that reimagine their workforces by tapping the
unprecedented power of people and machines working together in ways we've never
imagined.
In the future workplace where people move fluidly among different roles and projects,
social and emotional intelligence, cognitive abilities and critical-thinking skills will be
enormously beneficial, besides advanced technical skills.
Embracing new technologies, building new capabilities through continual retraining,
and having an adaptive mindset will be critical factors to succeed in the digital
economy.
Why oil is important
Oil: lifeblood of the industrialised nations Oil has become the world's most
important source of energy since the mid-1950s. Its products underpin modern
society, mainly supplying energy to power industry, heat homes and provide fuel
for vehicles and aeroplanes to carry goods and people all over the world.
In fact, oil meets 97 per cent of the UK transport sector demand. In addition, it also benefits our
lives in being vital to the production of many everyday essentials. Oil’s refined products are used
to manufacture almost all chemical products, such as plastics, fertilisers, detergents, paints and
even medicines, plus a whole host of other products that you might not expect.
Final energy consumption by fuel, UK (1970 to 2014)
Most oil is used for transport (car, lorries and planes) but around a quarter used for heating,
chemical plants and in other industry
Source: DECC
Here are some examples of what we owe to oil, every day of our lives:
• At school: rulers, crayons, ink and cartridges, glue, coverings on books, binders...
• For your health: coatings for pills, binding agent for creams, disposable syringes...
• In the home: contact lenses, cosmetics, clothing, fabrics, nail polish, deodorants,
shampoo, paint, upholstery and carpets, detergents for washing up and laundry, drycleaning fluid...
• Out shopping: shopping bags, credit cards, egg cartons, plastic milk bottles
• While cooking: non-stick pans, cling film, storage containers
• For building: roofing tiles, pipes, insulating material, paint
• On the move: petrol and diesel for cars and lorries, emergency services and trains,
asphalt road surfaces
• In the office: computer hardware, phones and faxes, diskettes, pens, chairs, printing
ink
• At your leisure: CDs, videos, cassette tapes, camera film, artists' paint, bicycle
handlebar grips, tyres, crash helmets, football boots, trainers, shin pads, windsurfers,
roller blades
• Garden: fertilisers, pesticides, garden furniture
Petroleum products used for energy by main sectors, UK (2000 to 2014)
Source: DECC
Through its extensive supply chain, the oil & gas industry employs hundreds of thousands of
people and makes a major contribution to the UK economy in terms of tax revenues,
technologies and exports. Tens of thousands of people work in the oil and gas industry. Each
week Britain produces about two million tonnes of oil and gas. This is worth about £37 million
pounds a day to the people of Britain.
Challenges
Action
Progress
Future opportunities
Sources: Oil & Gas in UK, Economic Report 2015
No jobs will be safe from robots: Scientists
With the advances in artificial intelligence, robots will be able to outperform humans
in any task
"Pepper" humanoid robots dancing to attract customers at an exhibition in Tokyo last month. Professor Bart Selman of Cornell University said
computers are "starting to 'hear' and 'see' as humans do". Business giants such as Google, Facebook, IBM, Microsoft and Tesla are investing
billions of dollars a year in AI systems. PHOTO: AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
UPDATED FEB 16, 2016, 07:57 AM
WASHINGTON • Drivers, caddies, sex workers - scientists warn that no job category will be safe from takeover by
robots as rapid developments in artificial intelligence (AI) threaten a new era of mass unemployment.
Intelligent machines will soon replace human workers in all sectors of the economy, senior computer scientists told
the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Washington.
"We are approaching a time when machines will be able to outperform humans at almost any task," said Professor
Moshe Vardi, director of the Institute for Information Technology at Rice University in Texas.
•
•
Artificial intelligence 'threat to human race'
WASHINGTON • Some of the world's great minds have warned that artificial intelligence, including
masterless drones, threatens the future of the human race.
British astrophysicist Stephen Hawking said in a BBC interview in 2014 the consequences of rapid technical
progress could be dire.
"It would take off on its own, and redesign itself at an ever increasing rate," he said. "Humans, who are
limited by slow biological evolution, couldn't compete and would be superseded. The development of full
artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race." Tech billionaires Bill Gates and Elon Musk have
issued similar warnings.
The question of what happens when machines begin to dominate people's lives has led scientists to call for
the establishment of an ethical framework for the development of artificial intelligence, as well as safeguards
for security in the years to come.
Last year Mr Musk - the owner of spacecraft manufacturer SpaceX - donated US$10 million (S$14 million) to
resolve such concerns, deeming artificial intelligence potentially more dangerous than nuclear weapons.
For Yale University ethicist Wendel Wallach, such dangers require a global response and he called for a
presidential order declaring that lethal autonomous weapons systems violated international humanitarian
law.
"The basic idea is that there is a need for concerted action to keep technology a good servant and not let it
become a dangerous master," he said.
Consultants McKinsey published research last year that said well-paid careers like doctors and hedge fund
managers are better protected than others.
AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE, THE GUARDIAN
"Robots are doing more and more jobs that people used to do. Pharmacists, prison guards, boning chicken,
bartending, more and more jobs, we're able to mechanise them."
Prof Vardi said 10 per cent of jobs related to driving in the United States could be lost to driverless cars in the next
25 years. He said it would be hard to think of any jobs that would not be vulnerable to robotics and AI - even sex
workers. "Are you going to bet against sex robots?" he asked. "I'm not."
"Society needs to confront this question before it is upon us: If machines are capable of doing almost any work
humans can do, what will humans do? Can the global economy adapt to greater than 50 per cent unemployment?"
he asked.
Professor Bart Selman, from Cornell University, told the weekend meeting that AI was switching quickly from
academic research into the real world.
"Computers are starting to 'hear' and 'see' as humans do... Systems can start to move and operate among us
autonomously."
He said business giants such as Google, Facebook, IBM, Microsoft and Tesla were already investing billions of
dollars a year in AI systems - investment in the sector in the US was by far the highest ever last year. Also, the
Pentagon had requested US$19 billion (S$26.6 billion) for developing intelligent weapons systems.
With more than 200,000 industrial robots in the US now, research is focusing on the reasoning abilities of
machines, and progress in this realm over the past 20 years has been spectacular, said Prof Vardi. "And there is
every reason to believe the progress in the next 25 years will be equally dramatic."
Last December, Singapore's Nanyang Technological University unveiled a humanoid "receptionist" that NTU said
could be a personal assistant in offices and homes in future and a social companion for the young and the elderly.
One of the fastest advancing areas of AI was machine vision - key to the self-driving vehicles - and particularly facial
recognition, Prof Selman said. "Facebook can recognise faces better than any of us."
He said that "in the next two or three years, semi-autonomous or autonomous systems will march into our society".
He listed self-driving cars and trucks, autonomous drones for surveillance and fully automatic trading systems,
along with house robots and other kinds of "intelligence assistance" which make decisions on behalf of humans.
It is not just the social issue of job losses that AI raises. The fear of artificial intelligence has even reached the United
Nations, where a group billing itself the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots met diplomats in October last year to warn
against a growing reliance on cheap drones and "stupid AI" that can be unpredictable in the real world.
AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE, THE GUARDIAN
Oil and gas: the engine of the
world economy
By Dr Maizar Rahman, Indonesian Governor for OPEC, Acting for OPEC Secretary General, on behalf of Dr Purnomo
Yusgiantoro, OPEC President and Secretary General, Minister of Energy and Mineral Resources of Indonesia. Tenth
International Financial and Economic Forum, Vienna, Austria - 10–11 November 2004
[Slide 1]
Excellencies, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen,
Let me begin by thanking the organisers of the Tenth International Financial and Economic Forum for inviting me to deliver this
address on “Oil and gas: the engine of the world economy”.
I shall focus on the oil industry, since this is OPEC’s principal area of interest. However, whenever necessary, I shall add some
remarks about gas. Oil has been the world’s major commercial energy source for many decades and the consensus view is that it
will maintain this leading role well into the 21st century.
[Slide 2] The pre-eminence of oil has run in parallel with the massive economic advances made in the 20th century and on into the
21st century. It is estimated that industrial production grew by around 50 times during the last century and that four-fifths of this
growth happened in the second half of the century, starting with the reconstruction period after the second world war.
[Slide 3] This resulted in an enormous increase in energy consumption.
[Slide 4] Most of the consumption has been concentrated in the OECD countries, although this is beginning to change now, with
higher growth rates in the developing countries, including China.
Oil dominated the world energy mix after the second world war, with the OECD accounting for 60–70 per cent of world oil
consumption. Total and per capita energy consumption were much lower in the developing countries throughout this period,
although this trend is now beginning to change. In both regions, there has been a steady increase in the use of gas.
[Slide 5] Currently, oil accounts for around 40 per cent of the world energy mix. This is because of its unique combination of
attributes — sufficiency, accessibility, versatility, ease of transport and, in many areas, low costs. These have been complemented
by a multitude of practical benefits that can be gained in an established infrastructure from decades of intensive exploitation and
use in the industrial, commercial and domestic fields. Advances in technology make oil a cleaner, safer and more efficient fuel.
[Slide 6] There should be plenty of oil around for decades to come. The world’s oil resource base is not a constraint, with regard to
meeting future demand. If we look at cumulative production, as a percentage of the estimated resource base, over the past four
decades, we see that this has been relatively stable, and this is likely to remain the case for the foreseeable future. Over and above
the world’s proven crude oil reserves, there is still plenty of oil that has yet to be discovered, in regions whose geological structures
suggest a high probability of commercially viable reserves.
The world’s proven reserves alone — of around 1,100 billion barrels — will be enough to meet demand for around 45 years, at
current production rates, in simple mathematical terms. However, in practice, the situation is more optimistic than this. To begin
with, production will not suddenly stop at a finite point; instead, there is likely to be a gradual transitional phase lasting many
decades, as occurred when the world moved from the coal era to the oil era. Also, while, on the one hand, annual output is forecast
to rise steadily in the early 21st century, on the other hand, recovery rates will also improve, through enhanced technology,
improved infrastructure and better accessibility. Moreover, there is “unconventional oil”, such as tar sands, oil shale and heavy oil,
and exploitation of this is expected to rise steadily in the future.
[Slide 7] Gas producers share many of the challenges of oil producers. Moreover, order and stability in the oil sector are essential
not just for oil, but also for gas. This is because of the linkage between oil and gas prices in many major consumer markets,
whereby oil price movements have an influence on gas prices.
Gas currently accounts for around 23 per cent of the world’s commercial energy mix. Gas is the source of commercial energy most
favoured by environmentalists, as well as being a reliable and highly efficient source of power generation. Production costs are
coming down too. But the transportation of gas remains expensive. As with oil, there are enough gas resources in the world to meet
demand for generations to come.
Let us see now how the situation may develop in the future, using the reference case from OPEC’s World Energy Model. Our
projections show global oil demand rising by 38 million barrels a day to 115 mb/d by 2025 — an annual average growth rate of 1.7
per cent.
[Slide 8] Oil’s share of the world energy mix will dip slightly during this period, from 40 to 37 per cent.
[Slide 9] OECD countries will continue to account for the largest share of world oil demand. However, almost three-quarters of the
increase in demand of 38 mb/d over the period 2002–25 will come from developing countries, whose consumption will almost
double. Asian countries will remain the key source of oil demand increase in the developing world, with China and India central to
this growth.
[Slide 10] At the global level, the transportation sector accounts for about 60 per cent of the rise in demand in 2000–25.
[Slide 11] Turning to supply, overall non-OPEC output is expected to continue to increase, reaching a plateau of 55–57 mb/d in the
post-2010 period. This represents an increase of 7–9 mb/d from 2002, although the eventual scale of this future expansion is
subject to considerable uncertainty. The key sources for the increase in non-OPEC supply will be Latin America, Africa, Russia and
the Caspian.
OPEC will increasingly be called upon to supply the incremental barrel. OPEC has both the capability and the will to do this.
[Slide 12] Around four-fifths of the world’s proven crude oil reserves are located in OPEC’s Member Countries. Moreover, these
reserves are more accessible and cheaper to exploit than those in non-OPEC areas. In 2025, OPEC is projected to meet more than
half the world’s oil demand, at 51 per cent, with 58 mb/d.
Let us now look briefly at gas. Our Member Countries hold almost half the world’s proven natural gas reserves. According to our
projections, world gas demand is expected to more than double in the first quarter of the 21st century, reaching almost 90 mb/d of
oil equivalent by 2025. This will constitute an average annual rate of demand growth of around 3.0 per cent. The share of gas in the
world energy mix will rise to around 30 per cent in this period.
[Slide 13] OPEC is deeply aware of its role in the evolving international oil market. The Organization’s core values are stable
markets, reasonable prices, steady revenues, secure supply and fair returns for investors.
OPEC monitors oil market developments closely for the short, medium and long terms, so as to provide the its Oil Ministers with the
necessary high-quality support material for their decision-making.
One of the most basic issues facing OPEC — and, let us not forget, other oil producers too — is to ensure that sufficient production
capacity will be available at all times to help meet the forecast heavy rise in oil demand. [Slide 14] Investment is needed: to meet
the forecast absolute increase in demand; to replace exhausted reserves; and to ensure that oil producers always have sufficient
spare capacity available to cope with sudden, unexpected shortages in supply. Also, the oil must be cleaner, safer and more
efficient than ever before.
Furthermore, producers need assurances of stable, predictable markets, just as much as consumers require certainty and
consistency with supplies — security of demand is as important as security of supply.
The required investment will be large, although it will not necessarily be different in magnitude to that observed in the past. Also,
the cost of investment in OPEC oil is much lower than in non-OPEC oil.
[Slide 15] However, the magnitude of the required capital injection is far from clear, even in the short and medium terms. This is
partly due to the wide range of feasible demand growth scenarios, but it is also reinforced by contrasting views on the potential
evolution of non-OPEC production. Uncertainties over future economic growth, government policies and the rate of development
and diffusion of newer technologies are among the main factors that lie behind this. To illustrate this, if we reduce our global
economic growth projections by just one per cent, this will lower the investment requirement for 2010 from a reference case $95 bn
to $70 bn — which is a big difference.
To appreciate the significance of all this, one must consider investment lead times that are measured in years rather than months,
as well as the importance of “getting it right” i.e. over-investment may result in excessive, costly, idle capacity and under-investment
may lead to a shortage of crude and higher prices. In both cases, the losses, especially for producing countries, and the possible,
broader associated damage, such as to the world economy, can be huge. Because of the long lead times, it may take years to
correct a situation of heavy over- or under-investment.
Clearly, any sound investment strategy must be built upon a solid base. This underlines the need for market order and stability
today, with reasonable prices. This is, sadly, not the case at the present time.
[Slide 16] Prices for OPEC’s Reference Basket of seven crudes have recently reached record levels. They rose above US $45 a
barrel for the first time ever last month; this compares with the widely accepted average level of $25.8/b from the inception of the
OPEC price band in 2000 through 2003.
[Slide 17] A combination of factors has contributed to this — even though, throughout, the market has remained well-supplied with
crude and fundamentals have been sound: higher-than-expected oil demand growth, especially in China and the USA; refining and
distribution industry bottlenecks in some major consuming regions, coupled with more stringent product specifications and
compounded by the recent hurricanes in the Americas; and the present geopolitical tensions and concern about adequacy of spare
capacity to meet possible supply disruptions. Combined, these factors have led to fears about a possible future supply shortage,
which, in turn, have resulted in increased speculation in futures markets, with substantial upward pressure on prices.
[Slide 18] To help restore order and stability, OPEC has raised its production ceiling three times, by a total of 3.5 million barrels a
day for OPEC-10 (OPEC, excluding Iraq), to 27.0 mb/d. We did this, even though our assessments had indicated that there was
sufficient crude in the market and that Member Countries were already producing well above previous ceilings. It was believed that,
as well as the actual physical fact of agreeing to these big increases in supply, such actions, in themselves, would also send a
powerful psychological signal that OPEC was ready to act in order to help stabilise prices.
[Slide 19] With regard to the ability to meet rising demand in the short-to-medium term, OPEC has spare production capacity of
around 1.5–2.0 mb/d, which would allow for an immediate additional increase in production. Furthermore, Member Countries have
plans in place to increase capacity by a further 1 mb/d towards the end of this year and by at least another 1 mb/d through 2005. In
addition, plans for additional capacity expansion are available and could be enacted soon; however, this capacity would, typically,
become available around 18 months after commencement of this process. Nevertheless, it must be pointed out that our latest
studies show that, for the third quarter, the market was over-supplied by nearly 2 mb/d and that this trend was being continued into
the fourth quarter, although to a lesser extent, due to demand seasonality and other factors.
These are all very big challenges that we are facing. And I say “we”, because I am talking about the oil industry as a whole —
producers, consumers, governments, the large oil companies, the financial institutions and any other party that has a significant
role to play in the general welfare, the effectiveness, the growth and the general evolution of the industry. Market order and stability
is a shared responsibility for all parties.
When OPEC makes its production agreements, it does so in the expressed expectation that non-OPEC producers will actively
support our measures, since this will make our decisions more effective, to everyone’s benefit. When OPEC turns its attention to
the future, we envisage this as a collective task for the industry and we seek to get as wide a range of views, opinions, information
and data as possible. The challenges facing all of us are too large, too complex and too important to be left to individual, concerned
groups.
[Slide 20] Big advances in dialogue and cooperation among producers and consumers have been an encouraging feature of the
past couple of decades, from large-scale international ministerial gatherings, such as the meetings of the now-institutionalised
International Energy Forum, to bilateral or regional contacts that extend across national boundaries. Indeed, the establishment of
the Forum’s Secretariat in an OPEC Member Country, Saudi Arabia, bears witness to OPEC’s commitment to dialogue and
cooperation. Recent years have also witnessed the development of a closer working relationship between OPEC and the
International Energy Agency, to exchange ideas and information. We are involved in a series of joint meetings among OPEC and
non-OPEC producers — the most recent was held in Oman last month.
For gas, the recent formation of the Gas Exporting Countries Forum recognises the need for discussion of issues of mutual interest
to gas producers and its role is likely to grow in the future. Its membership includes seven OPEC Countries. OPEC welcomes all of
this. The industry is much better-off if there is an underlying consensus on the means of handling, at least, the major issues that
concern all parties — such as price stability, security of demand and supply, investment, environmental issues and sustainable
development.
Excellencies, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen,
[Slide 21] We are confident that the petroleum industry will successfully rise to the challenges facing it in an increasingly globalised
industry, where technology is enabling us to make remarkable advances in every field of activity and where the orderly, equitable
provision of cleaner, safer energy services is seen as an integral part of sustainable development, the eradication of poverty and
the general enhancement of mankind.
Thank you.
1
Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries
Oil and gas: the engine of the
world economy
Dr Maizar Rahman
Indonesian Governor for OPEC
Acting for the Secretary General
Delivered on behalf of
Dr Purnomo Yusgiantoro
President of the Conference, and OPEC Secretary General
Indonesian Minister of Energy and Mineral Resources
Tenth International Financial and Economic Forum
Vienna, Austria, 10–11 November 2004
Real gross domestic product: 1960–2003
Real GDP in 1995 prices and exchange rates
Billion US $
35,000
30,000
25,000
OECD
20,000
15,000
10,000
DCs including China
5,000
0
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2003
GDP versus energy growth (world): 1971–2002
Total primary energy requirement (mtoe)
80000
75000
70000
65000
60000
55000
50000
45000
40000
13000
18000
23000
28000
33000
Real GDP (US $ billion)
38000
Energy consumption for OECD and DCs: 1971–2003
mboe/d
250
200
FCPEs
150
DCs incl. China
100
50
OECD
2003
2001
1999
1997
1995
1993
1991
1989
1987
1985
1983
1981
1979
1977
1975
1973
1971
0
Appeal of petroleum
Unique combination of attributes
Sufficiency, accessibility, versatility,
transportability
Low costs in many areas
Established infrastructure
Ever cleaner, safer and more efficient
The resource base is not a constraint
Cumulative production, as a percentage of the
estimated resource base, has been relatively stable
4500
?
4000
3500
bn barrels
3000
2500
2000
1500
Resource base*
1000
Cumulative production
500
0
1960
*/ Source: USGC
1975
1990
2005
2020
The challenge for gas
Sufficient world resources
Many shared challenges with oil
Prices linked with oil in many markets
Production costs falling
Transportation still expensive
World energy mix
%
Oil
Gas
Solids
Hydro/nuclear/
renewables
OPEC World Energy Model, 2004
2000
40.1
23.3
26.0
10.6
2010
38.7
25.7
25.8
9.8
2025
36.9
29.9
25.2
8.0
Annual growth in oil demand: 2002–25
million barrels a day p.a.
Asia: 65% of DCs increase,
1.2 especially China & India
1.0
0.8
China
huge potential (e.g. low vehicle
ownership)
But possible constraints:
infrastructure, policies
Asia
0.6
0.4
OECD Pac.
W. Europe
0.2
OPEC &
other exp.
N. America
Latin America.
Africa & M.E.
0.0
OECD
OPEC World Energy Model, 2004
DCs
other
FSU
Transition
economies
Annual global growth in oil demand by sector
million barrels a day
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
Transport
HH/Comm
Industry
-0.4
Elec. Gen.
-0.6
1971-1980
1980-1990
1990-2000
2000-2010
2010-2025
World oil production outlook in the reference case
million barrels a day
2002
2010
2020
2025
Non-OPEC
47.8
54.6
56.9
56.3
OPEC (incl. NGLs)
29.2
34.1
48.9
58.3
World
77.0
88.7
105.8
114.6
OPEC market share %
37.9
38.4
46.2
50.9
OPEC crude oil
Proven reserves 891 billion barrels
78.3% of world figure
Production 29 million barrels a day
40.1% of world figure
Cheaper to exploit than non-OPEC oil
Increasing call on OPEC oil in coming years
51% world oil market projected for 2025
OPEC’s objectives
Stable markets
Reasonable prices
Steady revenues
Secure supply
Fair returns to investors
Short, medium and long terms
Investment in production capacity
To meet increase in overall demand
To replace exhausted reserves
To cope with unexpected shortages
Oil must be cleaner, safer and more efficient
Security of demand is AS IMPORTANT AS
security of supply
Cumulative OPEC investment requirements:
effect of 1% lower world economic growth
450
400
If OPEC balances the market, the uncertain
volume requirements translate into huge
ranges of anticipated capital outlay needs
$258-382 billion
$(2003) billion
350
300
Already by 2010 an estimated uncertainty
of $25 billion exists between the reference
case and the low economic growth case
Reference case
250
200
This a central concern: where lies the
onus of maintaining sufficient spare
capacity?
Low economic
growth
150
100
$122-173 billion
50
$70-95 billion
0
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
1
Today’s oil market
OPEC concerned about high oil prices and volatility
49
49
46
46
43
43
40
40
38.6
2004
37
37
34
34
31
31
2003
28
28
25
25
Avg.'00-'03
22
22
19
19
Min-max range: 2000-03
16
16
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Note: orange rings denote OPEC Conferences.
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Market well-supplied with crude
but
Higher-than-expected demand
Downstream bottlenecks
Geopolitical tensions
Speculation
1
OPEC’s production agreements*
Objective: reasonable prices and stability
Three-stage OPEC-10 output ceiling rise
from 23.5 mb/d to:
25.5 mb/d from 1 July
26.0 mb/d from 1 August
27.0 mb/d from 1 November
Total rise 3.5 mb/d
*Agreements made at OPEC Conferences in Beirut on 3 June and Vienna on 15 September
OPEC crude oil production and capacity
36
Capacity
max
32
min
34
30
Production
28
26
24
*/ The production ranges for '04 & '05 are based on required OPEC crude production
for the balance from the survey of forecasts.
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
200 4*
2005*
Dialogue and cooperation
Big advances in recent years
The industry is much better off if there is an
underlying consensus on such major issues as
price stability, security, investment, the
environment and sustainable development
Rising to the challenges
Globalisation
Technology
Environment
Sustainable development
DCs
0.00
2003
2002
Nuclear
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
Hydro
1992
1991
1990
Gas
1989
Oil
1988
2002
2000
1998
1996
1994
1992
1990
1988
1986
1984
1982
1980
1978
1976
1974
1972
1970
1968
1966
1964
1962
O
E
C
D
25.00
1987
1986
1985
Solids
1984
1983
1982
1981
1980
1979
1978
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1960
0.00
1972
6.00
4.00
D
Cs
OECD
1971
23
Energy consumption by primary source: 1960–2003
40.00
35.00
30.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
mboe/d
20.00
18.00
16.00
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
2.00