Wednesday, December 31, 2025

Canadian cities triumph in new sustainability index

Well, this is surprising. A new ranking of the greenest and most sustainable cities in the world has three Canadian cities in the top ten, with one Canadian city right at the top of the pile.

The Green Cities Index, by Dutch sustainability experts Reinders Corporation (whoch makes industrial climate systems, dehumidifiers, etc), takes into account accessibility of green space per capita, renewable energy usage, air quality, public transportation efficiency, bikeability, and a few other measures. It shows Vancouver at No. 1, above the likes of Oslo, Stockholm and Copenhagen. Montreal is at No 7, and hometown Toronto comes in at No. 9.

I don't think of our cities as being in the same league as many European cities as regards suatainability, so this comes as quite a (pleasant) surprise. Vancouver scored particularly highly on green space and renewable energy, and had the best air quality in the study (this was presumably measured outside of wildfire season).

The full top 10 is:

  1. Vancouver, Canada
  2. Oslo Norway
  3. Stockholm, Sweden
  4. Munich, Germany
  5. Zurich, Switzerland
  6. Copenhagen, Denmark
  7. Montreal, Canada
  8. Sam Francisco, USA
  9. Toronto Canada
  10. London, UK

Interestingly, although the findings are reported by several media outlets, I can't find a link to the original Reinders index. Also interesting that a similar exercise by Canadian sustainability organization Corporate Knights has Vancouver down at No. 10, Toronto at No. 15, and, yes, the Scandinavian cities at the top.

Tuesday, December 30, 2025

What is fire?

So, here's a question: what actually is fire? Of course, everyone knows what fire is. We've known since the Stone Age, right?

Well, yes and no. We might think we know what fire is because it's so familiar. But scientifically, it's kind of hard to pin down.

Clearly, it's not a solid or a liquid. So, maybe a gas? The flames of a fire do involve hot gas products, which rise because they are less dense than the surrounding cooler air. But the flames we see are actually burning soot (burned particles of carbon) that glows yellow-orange because of the high temperatures. However, the flames only exist while the fire is burning, and don't exist in a stable state on their own. They can't be collected in a jar like CO2 or water vapour, and so they are not a gas.

How about plasma, the fourth state of matter? Plasma is like a soup of charged particles, electrons and ionized atoms. It's possible there might be enough ionized atoms in the hottest part of the most intense fires to qualify as a kind of weak plasma, but fire as a whole does not behave as a plasma.

In fact, it turns out that fire is not matter at all. Fire is a process, a kind of chemical reaction called combustion, which requires fuel (something to burn), oxygen, and an initial spark or heat source. Interestingly, it seems that fire - with visible oxygen-fuelled flames - is unique to Planet Earth (or so this Science Alert article claims, although this seems improbable to me).

Who is Kevin Hassett and why is he the front-runner for Fed Chair?

I confess I'd never even heard of Kevin Hassett until just recently, when he's suddenly the front-runner - possibly the only runner-  for the job of director the United States Federal Reserve (the Fed), one of the most powerful positions in the USA.

Well, it used to be a powerful position. Under Trump 2.0 it may well be demoted to the status of a largely ceremonial quango. Never shy of controversy, Donald Trump has publicly stated that "Anybody that disagrees with me will never be the Fed Chairman". Chilling stuff. Of course, Hassett is on record as saying that Trump would have "no weight" in interest rate decisions, but everyone knows differently: under Trump, the Fed's sole job is to reduce interest rates.

But, even more chilling is that there was a time - a time that lasted decades - when Hassett would definitely not have fit the mould for Trump's Fed director. See, he used to be an outspoken proponent of free trade and of the economic necessity for immigration. But then, suddenly, he seems to have experienced a Paulian conversion to isolationism, tariffs and the mass deportation of immigrants, coincidentally the very same policies that Trump espouses. His ex-friends and colleagues say they don't recognize the man.

So, what happened to disabuse him of beliefs he has held most of his adult life? Hassett himself says "I signed up with Trump knowing that some in my party might never forgive me ... I did so because Trump saw truths in plain sight ignored by politicial professionals and coastal elites". Eeeuww! 

So, is Trump's economic vision so very compelling? (Most economists disagree with it.) Is Trump just really that persuasive? Does he have some sort of a hold over Hassett? Or is Hassett either so submissive or so nakedly ambitious that he is willing to sacrifice all his beliefs and principles to get to the top of the pile (or what passes for the top of the pile under Trump)?

Hassett was a Colombia University Business School professor and an advisor to George Bush John McCain and Mitt Romney before joining Trump's National Economic Council. There are those, even within the Trump administration, who maintain that Hassett does not deserve the top Fed job anyway, particularly as he has not been at all effective as head of the National Economic Council. They say that all Hassett did at the NEC was to serve as a public messenger for Trump's agenda, without personally contributing to driving policy at all.

But, wait, that's EXACTLY the brief for Trump's Chair of the Federal Reserve. Hassett will be perfect!

Monday, December 29, 2025

Disturbingly, 2026 is looking even worse than 2025

The BBC's world affairs editor John Simpson has been reporting on wars around the world for some 60 years, since the 1960s. He is not a man prone to exaggeration; he is a meticulous and thoughtful journalist, and I have a great deal of respect for him and his views. So, when Mr. Simpson says he has never see a year like 2025, in terms of global conflicts, and he is worried as hell about 2026, I sit up and pay attention.

He sees 2025, and by extension, 2026, as a crucial year in world affairs. It was notable, not just because of the sheer number of major conflicts going on around the world, although that was part if it, with wars continuing in Ukraine-Russia (the total number of deaths is highly contested but it may be in the region of 400,000, with over a million in total casualties), in Palestine-Israel (over 70,000 deaths so far), in Sudan (150,000 deaths), in Cambodia-Thailand (only 50-60 killed so far but with plenty of potential for more), not to mention ongoing internal conflicts in Somalia, Myanmar, Congo, Ethiopia, and others. But what was notable to Mr. Simpson was the potential for one of those wars to bloom into a full-scale world war. (And, as I say, Simpson is a circumspect and judicious writer.)

The war in Ukraine is almost 3 years old now, and hundreds of peace initiatives have been tried and failed. With a much more pro-Russia American president in power, you can almost see Putin rubbing his hands with glee. Trump's apparent lack of interest in Europe and NATO, and America's fading influence and increasing isolationism, can only strengthen Putin's hand, as is becoming increasingly apparent. There are even references to a potential nuclear confrontation being casually dropped.

Conflicts such as the Vietnam War, the Gulf Wars and Kosovo all had the potential to tip over into something resembling a world war, but escalation was avoided. Mr. Simpson is less confident that escalation can be avoided in the case of Ukraine. President Zelenskyy himself has warned of the possibility, and Putin and some of his more hawkish henchmen have used some alarming language.

And then, of course, there is always China, whose alarming threats about Taiwan are ever-present. It has been carrying out some large-scale military drills in the area, and generally pushing boundaries to see what response it elicits from the West. It has ramped up its war of words. China's increasing influence on world affairs and its increasing economic power might give it the confidence to make a move in 2026. And America won't take that one lying down.

So, with all that doom and gloom, I wish you a happy and prosperous New Year. Oh, how I wish it!

Saturday, December 27, 2025

Agave is the new plastic

I had drinks today through an agave-based straw. Who knew there was such a thing?

The Sustainable Agave Company makes all those hard-to-replace single-use-plastic items like straws, cutlery and cups out of waste agave from the tequila industry.

It felt for all the world just like plastic. Definitely not going soggy anytime soon. I was impressed.

Even better, although all the stuff on their website is priced in US dollars, it turns out the company is Canadian, based in Toronto, and had been around since 2020.

Trump's top 25 lies of 2025

Well, CNN set itself a tough task: to come up with the top 25 Trump lies of 2025.

From all the many hundreds/thousands, picking 25 is not easy. They say they chose some because of the number of times they were repeated, some because of the importance of the topic, and some just because they were so bizarre or egregious.

Anyway, what they came up with was:

  • Trump secured $17 or $18 trillon in investment in 2025
  • "Every price is down"
  • Trump was reducing prescription drug prices by "2,000%, 3,000%"
  • Foreign countries pay the US government tariffs
  • Portland was "burning down"
  • Washington DC had no murders for six months
  • "I invaded Los Angeles and we opened up the water"
  • The Democratic governor of Maryland called Trump "the greatest president of my lifetime"
  • Ukraine "started" Russia's war on Ukraine
  • Trump was speaking "in jest" when he promised to immediately end the Ukraine war
  • The US government had planned to spend $50 million on "condoms for Hamas"
  • Every drug boat in the Caribbean "kills 25,000 Americans"
  • Trump "didn't say" he had no problem releasing full footage of a September boat strike
  • Numerous foreign leaders emptied prisons and mental institutions to send their most undesirable people into the US
  • Trump ended seven or eight wars
  • "The people of Canada like" the idea of becoming the 51st US state
  • Capitol rioters "didn't assault"
  • Critical media coverage of Trump is "illegal"
  • Trump didn't pressure the Justice Department to go after his opponents
  • Obama, Biden and Comey made up the Epstein files
  • The 2020 election was "rigged and stolen"
  • The US is "the only country in the world" with mail-in voting
  • Babies get 80-plus vaccines at once
  • Trump's big domestic policy bill didn't change Medicaid
  • The domestic policy bill was "the single most popular bill ever signed"

As good a list as any, I guess, and I've covered many of them in this very blog over the months. Seeing them there all together, though, makes you realize the enormity of what Trump has been feeding the American public, and just how serious a psychological problem he has.

Friday, December 26, 2025

Should the US be involving itself in Nigeria?

Donald Trump has a new crusade to fight: hundreds of thousands of Christians are being killed by Muslim fundamentalists in Nigeria. He accuses Islamic State (IS) of "targeting and viciously killing, primarily, innocent Christians, at levels not seen for many years, and even centuries!", and accuses the Nigerian government of continuing "to allow the killing of Christians", which of course Nigeria denies. But that is more than enough for him to wade into a neutral country and carry out military strikes there, which is his idea of fun. Mr. Trump wished a merry Christmas to "dead terrorists".

The Nigerian Foreign Minister, on the other hand, told the BBC that the multiple air strikes on Christmas Day were were part of a "joint operation" in a region of northwestern Nigeria where IS is know to have operations, and that they had "nothing to do with a particular religion". But hey, let's not quibble, Trump may have misunderstood that part. 

But - just as with his ongoing campaign against Venezuela and his characterization of the Afrikaners in South Africa - a detailed BBC report shows that it's not even clear that Trump is working from reliable information. Individuals as varied as Ted Cruz and TV host Bill Maher have been pushing the narrative that the Nigerian Jihadist group Boko Haram (not Islamic State, but hey, they're all the same, right?) has been responsible for killing "over 100,000" (or possibly "50,000"?) Christians, and burning "18,000 churches" and "2,000 Christian schools". This stuff gets disseminated widely, and elaborated upon, by the Republican social media machine.

When pressed, these activists almost all refer back to reports by the International Society for Civil Liberties and Rule of Law (InterSociety for short), which monitors and tracks human rights abuses across Nigeria. InterSociety claims that jihadist groups have killed 100,000 Christians between 2009 and 2025, as well as 60,000 "moderate Muslims", although it's not entirely clear where they get these figures from. The data sources they do mention do not seem to reflect the figures they publish, according to the BBC. In the first two-thirds of 2025 alone, InterSociety claims that 7,000 Christians were killed, based, they say, on media reports, even though most of those media reports do not actually mention the religious identity of victims.

Both Boko Haram and Islamic State West Africa tend to operate almost exclusively in north and northeastern Nigeria, which is a predominantly Muslim region, an area where relatively few Christians live. Nigeria's huge 236 million population is pretty much evenly split between Muslims and Christians, so calling it an "existential threat" for Christians (Trump again) is clearly ridiculous, as are claims from other US Christian groups and Republican politicians that Christians in the country could be "completely wiped out".

InterSociety also includes in its figures deaths at the hands of the militant (largely Muslim) Fulani cattle and sheep herders, which researchers say are mainly protesting about access to land and water and other ethnic tensions, and are not jihadists as InterSociety characterizes them. InterSociety itself has been accused of links with the Indigenous People of Biafra (Ipob), a proscribed group fighting for a breakaway state in the mainly Christian southeast of Nigeria. The Biafra Republic Government in Exile (BRGE) has also played a key role in promoting the "Christian genocide" in the US Congress over the years.

Nigerian politics - like that of the US, but even more so - is complicated and murky. It is far from clear that any kind of Christian genocide, or even a concerted anti-Christian hostility or persecution, is happening in Nigeria. It's even less clear that the USA should be throwing its weight around there. For an administration that claims it wants nothing to do with any "forever wars", it's sure doing a lot to start them.

And where are we with robotaxis and self-driving cars?

I confess I had written off self-driving cars completely several years ago, after a series of accidents and the admission that, actually, self-driving cars were not as easy as initially predicted, and that maybe some problems (including those tricky moral ones) maybe forever outside the purview of computers.

But, undeterred, some companies have persisted with the idea, with mixed results. The biggest, best-known ones are Tesla's Robotaxi (which uses its popular Model Y cars) and Google/Alphabet's Waymo (which uses the sexier Jaguar i-Pace sports utility vehicle). But other companies are also in with a shout, including Uber's Avride, Amazon's Zoox, Volkswagen, and Aurora's driverless trucks. (Some companies, like GM, have retreated from their autonomous car aspirations.)

They are progressing, if slowly, although Tesla in particular is progressing much slower than Mr. Musk led us to believe. It has a modest 30 Robotaxis operating in Austin, Texas (which seems to be ground zero for autonomous car testing), and they all have a human in the passenger seat monitoring them, for now at least. That's a far cry from Musk's 2016 promise of cars driving themselves across the country within two years, and his 2019 promise of a million Robotaxis on the road within a year. 

Google's Waymo fleet is larger (Google actually started its self-driving car research well before Tesla), with about 200 vehicles in Austin, and another 2,300 in Phoenix, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Atlanta, with plans to extend to 20 more cities in 2026, including Dallas, Washington, Miami, and London, England. Waymos operate without human monitors.

Mr. Musk is still saying that, after a slow, cautious start, Tesla will overtake Waymo and, for some reason, many deep-pocketed investors seem to believe him. Millions of Teslas on the road today have the hardware to convert into self-driving vehicles with just a tweak of the software. Plus, Tesla's system relies solely on cameras (lots of cameras), while Waymo and other companies use a combination of cameras, radar and laser sensors. Cameras alone are a cheaper solution, but they can easily be flummoxed by fog, snow, glare and other factors, and many commentators see Tesla's fixation with cameras as a severe limitation, especially as the cost of radar and laser sensors continues to fall.

It's far from clear that self-driving cars and taxis will ever generate trillions of dollars in revenue, as Musk insists, or that they will ever achieve profitability. There are many hidden overheads, like manned monitoring centres, special cleaning, etc, that are rarely mentioned. Power outages, as occurred in San Francisco recently, are also a potential issue, as self-driving cars grind to halt in that eventuality. They still have problems understanding hand signals, and have often been reported ignoring police officers, firefighters and emergency workers trying to direct traffic (and even, in numerous occasions, ignoring a school bus' signals), resulting in some close calls. A driverless Waymo tax in Scottsdale, Arizona went AWOL earlier this year, and started spinning in circles in a parking lot, with the hapless passenger locked in. Although no deaths for some time...

UPDATE

Of course, these are just the Western/American developments. As you might imagine, China is way ahead on this stuff. Baidu's Apollo Go driverless taxi service has been operating in dozens of colors in China for some time now, and has accumulated millions of driverless rides. Ride-sharing apps Uber and Lyft have recently announced partnerships with Baidu, and Chinese robotaxis are expected to hit the streets of London and other western cities next year.