# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Finnish Parliament has approved a government proposal to ban the burning of coal for energy production from May 2029.

Coal will be gradually phased out over the next decade, with existing coal plants owned by Fortum and other energy firms forced to wind down their operations. A public programme will be introduced to compensate some of the costs, a parliamentary official said.

After May 1 2029, coal may only be used in Finland in an emergency.

"It has been planned for quite some time, yesterday it was approved," said Lauri Tenhunen, a senior adviser to the Parliamentary commerce committee, which prepared the legislation.

The legislation was strongly supported by Kimmo Tiilikainen, the Finnish environment minister, who has been campaigning for the Finnish coal phase-out to be accelerated in order to minimise carbon dioxide emissions and mitigate climate change.

The decision puts Finland in line with many other Western nations turning away from coal power: the "dirtiest" form of fossil fuel power. France and Sweden plan to phase out coal in the next few years, while the UK, Ireland, Italy and Austria all aim to do so by 2025, followed by several other European Union member states in the following years. Canada aims to phase out coal by 2030.

"Already, most EU member states have banned new coal power plants," Gerard Wynn, an energy consultant for the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, told Renew Economy. "By approving a coal phase-out plan, Finland joins 10 other EU countries planning to eliminate existing coal power plants as well."

Coal - mostly imported from Russia - represents just eight per cent of Finland's total energy consumption. Renewable energy sources contribute almost 40 per cent of Finland's energy consumption. Nuclear power and biofuel extracted from Finland's natural resources, such as peat and wood, also contribute significantly to its energy mix.

The decision was largely welcomed by environment campaigners: "We are happy that the coal ban is finally true," Olli Tiainen of Greenpeace Nordic said in a statement. "2029 is, however, not fast enough, but it is definitely the right direction. This opens up the possibility to ban other fossil fuels as well." Tiainen added that coal burning should not be replaced with biofuel and instead should be replaced with climate neutral energy sources.

Since approving the legislation, Finland has used a meeting of EU ministers to call on the bloc to commit to working towards a net-zero carbon footprint by 2050. Finland will assume the EU's rotating presidency later this year, and is expected to make climate mitigation a priority during its premiership.

"The European Union must align our climate and energy policy according to the 1.5°C [rise in average global temperatures] target. That means that the EU must achieve carbon neutrality by 2050," Tiilikainen told Reuters. "Finland is prepared to take this work forward during our presidency and we are aiming to reach the Council conclusions during that time."

Sign up to the E&T News e-mail to get great stories like this delivered to your inbox every day.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Finnish Parliament has approved a government proposal to ban the burning of coal for energy production from May 2029. Coal will be gradually phased out over the next decade, with existing coal plants owned by Fortum and other energy firms forced to wind down their operations.

# data[].attributes.headline
Increasing logging could hurt the climate

# data[].attributes.subject
Increasing logging could hurt the climate

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The researchers simulated the impact of a permanent increase of nine million cubic metres - from 58 to 67 million cubic metres - in the annual constructional timber harvest on carbon sequestration, concluding that it would take more than 100 years to rectify the negative impact.

A total of 68.9 million cubic metres of industrial roundwood was harvested in Finland in 2018.

The amount of greenhouse gas emissions released into the atmosphere - measured in carbon dioxide equivalents - would in that scenario rise by seven million tonnes a year. Road traffic, in comparison, produces an estimated 11 million tonnes of carbon dioxide-equivalent emissions a year in Finland.

The simulation takes into account the fact that increasing the use of bioenergy and wood products can compensate for roughly a half of the decrease in carbon sequestration.

"In order to compensate for the detriment, you would have to succeed in promoting forest growth considerably from the baseline of the calculations. The wood should additionally be used to make products that store carbon longer than existing products. They should also reduce the use of oil, coal and natural gas compared to existing products," reads a press release from Luke, Syke and the University of Eastern Finland.

The findings can be interpreted as a validation of the climate policy approach of the European Union, which is encouraging its member states to preserve carbon sinks at the level of 2000-2010 in the 2020s.

The study was funded by the Strategic Research Council of the Academy of Finland and supported by FORBIO, a project focusing on the sustainable bioenergy production potential of underutilised land in Europe.

The findings were published in the Journal of Environmental Management.

Aleksi Teivainen - HT
Source: Uusi Suomi

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Increasing logging would severely hurt effort to combat climate change, confirms study

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The researchers simulated the impact of a permanent increase of nine million cubic metres - from 58 to 67 million cubic metres - in the annual constructional timber harvest on carbon sequestration, concluding that it would take more than 100 years to rectify the negative impact.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Mineria Exar and Sales de Jujuy have not provided a free and informed consultation process with the indigenous communities who own the territory where their two projects are located. Though there was some participation, the consultation process did not take place free from influence.

The companies are obliged to provide information in a timely and comprehensible manner. In fact, the lengthy and technical nature of the materials made them very difficult to parse.

According to statements from community members, the companies also failed to disclose all relevant information on the risk factors and their potential environmental impacts, as well as access to technical studies on water pollution risks.

The concerns of communities linked to the environmental impacts of mining have not been sufficiently taken into account

Although it is the state's responsibility to guarantee the right to participate in consultations, the FARN investigation highlighted the absence of competent authorities at different points in the process.

The provincial government did not supervise dialogue between international companies and local communities. Nor did it comply with the requirement to provide basic information to help understand the environmental impacts of lithium mining in the area. This has negatively affected the communities' ability to evaluate the project in question and/or to control their activities, according to FARN.

The concerns of communities linked to the environmental impacts of mining have not been sufficiently taken into account, the report concludes.

China's participation

The lithium project led by Minera Exar and involving Chinese company Jiangxi Ganfeng Lithium was the second to be set up in the area, after Sales de Jujuy.

Minera Exar was originally made up of the Canadian company Lithium Americas Corp and Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile (SQM). However, in 2017, Jiangxi Ganfeng, the largest lithium producer in China, made an investment in Lithium Americas, becoming its largest shareholder.

The share of Lithium Americas owned by Jiangxi Ganfeng

Jiangxi Ganfeng then financed the construction of the lithium extraction project in Argentina with US$125 million, for which it obtained the right to purchase lithium carbonate production from Minera Exar at market prices for the next 20 years. Currently, Jiangxi Ganfeng owns 16.94% of the shares of Lithium Americas.

Just one year later, Jiangxi Ganfeng and Lithium Americas acquired SQM's shares in Minera Exar, putting Minera Exar and its lithium project in Argentina in the hands of the Chinese company (37.5%) and its Canadian peer (62.5%).

Thanks partly to the contribution of Chinese capital, the Minera Exar project has continued its progress. Today it is in the initial stage of production with a planned start of lithium sales for 2020.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Lithium mine fails to respect communities' rights in Argentina

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Mineria Exar and Sales de Jujuy have not provided a free and informed consultation process with the indigenous communities who own the territory where their two projects are located. Though there was some participation, the consultation process did not take place free from influence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Fires raging across the Amazon in recent weeks have gripped the world's attention and renewed concerns over deforestation in this iconic ecosystem. The widespread use of fire to deliberately clear the rain forest not only endangers its rich biodiversity but also releases carbon into the atmosphere, ultimately contributing to global warming. Now a study has found that deforestation adds to warming in the Amazon region-which could ultimately hurt the very farms for which the rain forest is being destroyed.

Forests have a natural cooling effect for myriad reasons: they cycle water from the ground to the air, where the water takes heat with it as it evaporates (a process called evapotranspiration); their canopies provide shade; and their trees create a rough terrain, which dissipates heat more efficiently than smoother, clear-cut fields. So when forests disappear, the denuded land heats up. But this effect is not limited to the deforested areas, according to the new paper, published last month in Environmental Research Letters.

The researchers analyzed a combination of satellite data and weather station records from more than 2,000 sites in Brazil's Amazon-Cerrado region and found temperatures also rise in the "immediate neighborhood" of a deforested area-up to 50 kilometers away-says study co-author Sally Thompson, an ecohydrologist at the University of Western Australia. "This was very clearly indicating that there is a mechanism by which the biophysical warming from deforestation is being transported in space to the area around it," she says. Thompson and her colleagues do not yet know what causes this effect, but she thinks it may be as simple as wind pushing warmer air outward from deforested sites.

Paulo Brando, a tropical ecologist at the University of California, Irvine, and the Woods Hole Research Center, who was not involved in the study, cites reduced evapotranspiration as another possible contributor. He says the cumulative effect of the patchwork of clear-cutting is enough to impact the entire region. "As you slow down the capacity of this system to cycle water, you cause regional warming," he adds.

Thompson and her colleagues found that deforestation has caused an overall increase of 0.5 degree Celsius in the Amazon between 1985 and 2017. Since 1975, greenhouse gases accumulating in the atmosphere have caused the Earth's average temperature to rise at a rate of about 0.2 degree C every decade. The entire Amazon has warmed more than one degree C, and in some places, it has done so by as much as two degrees C. "It's safe to say that the majority of warming in Brazil is from greenhouse gas emissions. But the warming from deforestation is considerable and is meaningfully worsening and hastening climate change in Brazil," says Avery Cohn, an environmental scientist at Tufts University and the study's lead author.

The "slash and burn" agriculture (in which vegetation is cut, left to dry and then burned) driving much of the loss of the Amazon has a long history in Brazil, where dense jungle makes clearing land by other means extremely difficult. Although the country had made major strides to curtail deforestation in recent decades, Jair Bolsonaro, who became president earlier this year, has promoted agriculture and resource extraction in the rain forest. In 2018 Brazil's supreme court upheld changes that softened laws protecting the Amazon, a move environmentalists said would promote illegal deforestation. Last month a sharp increase in fires in the rain forest, as compared with the previous year, set off an international outcry. Under pressure, Bolsonaro sent troops to fight the blazes and temporarily banned slash-and-burn practices. Within 48 hours of the ban, however, Brazil's National Institute for Space Research had recorded about 2,000 new fires that had broken out in the Amazon. According to NASA experts, the timing and location of many of the fires detected so far this year are consistent with land clearing.

The researchers say their results could help convince farmers that clearing forest may not be in their own best economic interests, because agriculture is particularly susceptible to temperature changes-last year a rash of heat waves damaged crops around the world. Brazilian farmers are influential in environmental politics and have a strong lobby in the national government, Cohn says. Showing them that deforestation nearby can significantly increase surface temperatures in their fields-potentially killing crops as a result-could coax them to consider conservation measures. "Protecting the environment can have private returns to the landholder," he says. "Understanding the future of agriculture and how it relates to conservation is incredibly important to help farmers make informed decisions about the right balance between production and protection."
This story is part of Covering Climate Now, a global collaboration of more than 250 news outlets to strengthen coverage of the climate story.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Deforestation Intensifies Warming in the Amazon Rain Forest

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fires raging across the Amazon in recent weeks have gripped the world's attention and renewed concerns over deforestation in this iconic ecosystem. The widespread use of fire to deliberately clear the rain forest not only endangers its rich biodiversity but also releases carbon into the atmosphere, ultimately contributing to global warming.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This week the House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on legislation that would permanently ban any future offshore oil and natural gas activity in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico and along the Outer Continental Shelf of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. If successful, these measures could strongly affect future oil and natural gas production at a time when technology and government cooperation have dramatically improved every aspect of the industry.

The Gulf of Mexico remains a prime resource for oil and gas, currently providing 16 percent of all domestic oil production. Local revenue sharing from these activities provides major economic benefits to neighboring states, particularly Louisiana. Permanently restricting activity in the Eastern Gulf will take both oil and revenues off the table, and will not deter future offshore development activities further to the south, by Mexico.

Banning all future activities many miles offshore in the waters of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans would preclude even the most careful exploration using sophisticated technology. It is difficult for most Americans to believe that ninety four percent of our offshore federal acreage is today off limits to oil and gas exploration and development. Yet our neighbors are already aggressively pursuing and benefitting from the Gulf.

These proposed restrictions are taking place at a time when offshore exploration and production is expanding around the globe. Nearly 30 percent of global crude oil output now comes from offshore production. Natural gas output from offshore has risen by 50 percent since the year 2000. China and Russia are exploring in the Arctic. Saudi Arabia and Norway remain highly active. Mexico is rapidly expanding its own activities in the Gulf, including a recent lease for exploration by China. Brazil has become a global leader in deepwater production.

These early votes in the House are about more than offshore exploration. They comprise the opening salvoes of the 2020 election process. From presidential candidates to those running for Congress, the national leadership of the Democratic Party has signaled that its top political issue in 2020 will be climate change, including proposals for a dramatic restructuring of America's energy policies, practices and infrastructure.

The Democratic majority in the House and most of that Party's presidential candidates are simply not interested in stopping future offshore oil exploration and extraction. Their clear objective is to eliminate all fossil fuels, as soon as possible. We are seeing proposals to spend trillions of dollars toward the elimination of all fossil fuels within the next decade, to be replaced through vaguely worded policies designed to bring about unbounded amounts of alternate energy that, frankly, do not yet exist.

As one example, candidate Kamala Harris recently released her "10 Trillion Dollar Climate Change Plan," which at bottom would "require the world to reduce greenhouse gas emissions roughly 50 percent by 2030 and reach net zero global emissions by 2050." Terming the United States "the largest single greenhouse gas emitter in history," she offers "a bold target to exceed the Paris Agreement climate goals and achieve a clean economy by 2045, investing $10 trillion in public and private funding to meet the initial 10-year mobilization. By 2030 we will run on 100 percent carbon neutral electricity, all new buses, heavy duty vehicles, and vehicle fleets will be zero emission. All new buildings will be carbon-neutral."

Let's talk about today. The issue of climate change is indeed global, and other countries must be encouraged to do their part. Here in the United States, CO2 emissions are at their lowest levels in a generation, thanks to the increased use of natural gas and cleaner fuels, evidence that energy and climate progress can coexist. A recent report by Air Visual indicated that 47 of the 50 most polluted cities in the world are in either India or China. Fortune Magazine notes that China is the world's largest producer of greenhouse gases, and by far the world's heaviest user of coal. Politicians who want to bring about responsible global behaviors in such areas should be advertising the dramatic technological, safety and environmental improvements the U.S. has made. We are a role model for countries such as China to follow.

In the actual world of energy production the reality is that while an "all-of-the-above" energy approach - including renewables - is important, natural gas and oil are going to be essential for at least the next few decades. Oil and natural gas currently supply 67 percent of the energy used in our nation, with the U.S. Energy Information Administration is projecting consumption to grow over the next 30 years. The U.S. continues to import oil daily, as we are only utilizing a very small amount of our vast potential offshore energy resources.

Government projections show that even under optimistic scenarios for renewables, natural gas and oil will supply about 60 percent of U.S. energy needs in 2040. And in a global marketplace, where economies are expanding, and living standards are increasing, the demand for gas and oil in developing countries is growing. Current projections are that global demand for oil consumption will grow by over 10% by 2040, and demand for natural gas will increase by over 40 percent. Natural gas is projected to increase by 43%.

As our country shifts toward clean energy, it is important that we do so in a manner that does not impact our economic and national security. We are now the world's leading refiner and producer of oil and natural gas. This not only provides good jobs and strong growth in our communities but also guarantees that our economy is safer from foreign manipulation and our national security is less likely to be intimidated by potential adversaries.

Americans should think hard about whether such draconian restrictions are needed, and what our economic and national security costs might be if we fail to take advantage of energy resources that are under our own jurisdiction. We benefit every day from the strength of our energy sector, buttressing the health of our economy and national security in a world of frequent turmoil.

All Americans should be concerned with political leaders who are willing to take a known and valuable energy resource off the table when we can work cooperatively and safely to ensure our future energy needs are met and our national security is not at risk. Why should we tie our own hands behind our back?
Jim Webb is Former Secretary of the Navy and former Democratic Virginia Senator. Jim Nicholson is Former Secretary of Veterans Affairs and Former U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See. They are National Chairs of
Related Articles

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
American Energy Security and Climate Change | RealClearEnergy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This week the House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on legislation that would permanently ban any future offshore oil and natural gas activity in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico and along the Outer Continental Shelf of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Kenya, through Geothermal Development Cooperation (GDC) has offered training on collection of geosciences data and information to 20 geologists from four African countries in a move aimed at unlocking the continent's unexploited green energy and natural resources valued at billions of shillings.

The event dubbed The Geothermal Leapfrog Software training that was held at the Geothermal Centre of Excellence in Naivasha, Kenya attracted participants from Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya and Tanzania.

GDC Chief Executive Johnson Ole Nchoe said the training focused on strengthening the mechanism for gathering, disseminating and archiving critical geological data required by investors and policy makers.

Access to Geoscience data, he stated is essential for scientific investigation, managing geological hazards, land use evaluation and classification, civil engineering projects, formulating government resource policy and efficient exploitation of natural resources

Within the framework of Energy, Climate Change and Sustainable Development Goal, the governments of most African countries are keen and committed to explore and further develop geothermal energy as one of the alternative renewable energy resources in their respective countries.
RELATED: Kenya Electricity firm (KenGen) wins geothermal tender in Ethiopia
This is despite the fact that among various challenges to achieve this strategic energy development objective in a sustainable manner is the inadequate skilled manpower in the areas of geothermal science and technology

"With credible geological and geoscientific data, it is much easier to establish the amount of natural resources under Kenya's and Africa's feet. This effectively reduces exploration risks and increase discovery rates of natural resources

Drilling of geothermal wells is a very expensive activity. In addition, it is a very risky business because there are chances of either striking steam or striking nothing," said Ole Nchoe

According to geological experts most of the available geological/geosciences data in Africa are outdated. This affects the credibility of the resource information, and has impacted on the bankability of exploration projects.

The Geothermal Leapfrog Software training was carried out under the auspices of the Interim Project Coordination Unit -Africa Geothermal Centre of Excellence (IPCU -AGCE). It was sponsored by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in partnership with the New Zealand Geothermal Company.
READ: Kenya's robust energy approach a lesson to Africa
"The objective of such training is to enhance the capacity of geothermal experts in collecting, integrating, processing and interpreting geoscientific data, as well as develop a three dimensional conceptual model using the software that guides well targets and reservoir depth.

Geothermal projects typically have sparse data to work with, so you need tools that help you make the most of what you have. The availability of real time information and data can shorten the feedback loop between results monitoring, policy formulation and investment. It also accelerates the speed and scale at which development actors can implement change" said the CEO.

Data types that the training addressed included geology, geophysics, hydrothermal alteration and temperature data. It also took into account multidisciplinary data streams for well planning and field management.

One of the trainers from GDC Leonard Wamalwa noted that access to high-quality geoscientific products and data reduces the risk of companies venturing to discover new prospects and deposits.

"Geoscience data is also an important resource for assessment, monitoring and design of response strategies for many natural hazards including volcanoes, earthquakes and landslides among other phenomena.

Improved information insights also inform investors, as well as regulators and the general public who are increasingly demanding sustainable energy solutions.
ALSO READ: Kenya's best company in Renewable Energy named
Technology and innovation that reduces the associated costs of geothermal exploration and the development of new fields gives companies the edge and pushes the industry forward." explained Wamalwa.

Kenya has heavily invested in geothermal energy as it targets 100 per cent transition to green energy by 2020 to address the climate change challenge.

Speaking at the first Global Conference on Sustainable Blue Economy from Kenya, Canada and Japan co-hosted in Nairobi, President Uhuru Kenyatta said renewable energy makes up 70 per cent of Kenya's installed electric power capacity, with investment scaled up.

According to the Renewables Global Status 2018, Kenya tops in Africa with 700 megawatts (MW) of geothermal power.

The US has the largest geothermal generating capacity with 2,500 megawatts followed by the Philippines (1,900 MW), Indonesia (1,800 MW), Turkey (1,100 MW), New Zealand (1000 MW), Mexico (900 MW), Italy (800 MW) and Iceland (750 MW).

Kenya beats technological heavyweight Japan which has been ranked tenth with an output of 500 MW.

The rest of the world shares 950 MW. Ethiopia is the only other African country with developed geothermal energy (7 MW).

Geothermal is widely considered a preferable, low-cost renewable energy source due to low emissions when compared to thermal sources.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Kenya offers geothermal exploration training to African experts | Pumps Africa

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Kenya, through Geothermal Development Cooperation (GDC) has offered training on collection of geosciences data and information to 20 geologists from four African countries in a move aimed at unlocking the continent's unexploited green energy and natural resources valued at billions of shillings.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Kenya's carrot-and-stick approach to Somalia will not work

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
History has a strange habit of reversing roles. It was only yesterday when Somalia's irredentist quest of pan-Somali unification strategy cast an overarching shadow on the Horn of Africa; pressuring Kenya to relinquish the Somali-inhabited part of northeastern Kenya. The roles today are ironically reversed, with Somalia now on the receiving end of Kenya's intensifying diplomatic pressure to resolve its maritime boundary dispute out of court rather than through the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

The maritime boundary dispute is primarily fuelled by the claims on natural resources such as marine fish, oil and gas made by both countries. Interest in Kenya (and later on Somalia) for oil and gas exploration has seen a sharp increase in recent years. The ICJ at The Hague is set to convene on September 9 to listen to testimony by both parties in their maritime delimitation dispute.

The Kenya-Somalia legal tussle started in August 2014 when Somalia filed a case before the ICJ. At the heart of the dispute are Kenya and Somalia's claims to an overlapping area of continental shelf. Oil deposits are found in the disputed 42,000 square kilometres in the Indian Ocean between the line of parallel latitude and the equidistance line, the latter of which lies in Somalia. This creates a disputed triangle of more than 100,000 square kilometres - roughly the same size as the Jubbaland region of Somalia - of oil and gas-rich waters.

Somalia wants the maritime border to run along the line of the land border to the south-east whilst Kenya wants it determined by a parallel line of latitude to the east.
Why Kenya wants to settle out of court
In 2009, Kenya and Somalia signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU), and in 2011 they brought it to the UN. Both countries have put forward conflicting interpretations of the MoU. Kenya asserts that it contains a method for an out-of-court settlement of the maritime dispute. On the other hand, Somalia had as early as 2010 declared the MoU as "non-actionable" after it gave rise to controversy in Somalia.

Somalia quickly engaged the ICJ as a recourse to negotiation, fearing that Kenya would make a new reservation by altering its Optional Clause acceptance to exclude the World Court's jurisdiction over maritime boundary disputes. As expected, Kenya confirmed those suspicions on January 24 2017 when it lodged a new reservation opting out of the compulsory dispute settlement procedure concerning maritime delimitations.

Since then, Kenya has been actively pushing for an out-of-court settlement, chiefly because it believes that it has a slim chance of actually winning the dispute. There is some truth to this concern as it's most likely that the court will favour Somalia (entirely or partly). This is due to Somalia's boundary claim which is rested on the 'three-stage' delimitation approach that is systematically followed in the jurisprudence of the ICJ. It is the standard practice for maritime delimitation disputes.

What's more, Kenya is fully aware of its somewhat limited options. Any sign of recalcitrance over formally recognising and complying with the outcome will inevitably invite strong regional and international consequences. Indeed, following Nigeria's disapproval of the ICJ's judgement in the land and maritime boundary dispute between itself and Cameroon, the United States, United Kingdom and France exerted substantial diplomatic pressure on Nigeria to ensure full compliance with the decision. This troubling fact has been picked up by ordinary Kenyans, where on June 28, a group of private lawyers filed a petition with the court arguing that the case contravenes Kenya's constitution.
Borrowing a page from China's playbook
Kenya's approach to this issue resembles one pursued by a larger country thousands of miles away. Presently, China is involved in territorial disputes with Southeast Asian nations over maritime delimitations and the sovereignty of offshore islands in the South China Sea.

China has strategically pursued negotiation through the so-called 'dual-track' approach to find solutions to the South China Sea issue. It believes that the only way these disputes can be resolved is through direct negotiations and dialogue with the parties concerned, with joint development as the most likely outcome.

Similarly, Kenya argues that the disputed sea-shelf area can be settled through direct negotiations with the hope that the eventual outcome will be a joint development zone between both countries. In reality, China's 'dual-track' approach is centred around a dual-strategy that employs the subliminal carrot (trade and investment) and stick (diplomatic pressure) approach.

Kenya is aware of this and has thus far exerted considerable effort in replicating China's tested approach by deploying both carrots and sticks. For example, in September 2016, Kenya ostensibly lifted a decade-old travel ban by agreement. For the first time since 2006, direct flights from Mogadishu to Nairobi were launched, thus deploying the attractive carrot. However, in May 2019, Kenya re-introduced the ban and further banned unaccompanied luggage on aircraft from Somalia - hammering Somalia with the proverbial stick.

In a similar move, in March 2017, Kenya presented Somalia with an enticing promise of visa-waivers for Somali diplomatic and service passport holders - only for that policy to be unexpectedly rescinded in May 2019 when Kenya deliberately barred three Somali officials over their failure to obtain visas from the Kenyan embassy in Mogadishu.

Exacerbating the diplomatic row between the countries, Kenya tweeted in June about a meeting with the president of the breakaway northern territory of Somaliland, suggesting that it is an independent country.

However, Kenya's dual strategy of diplomatic pressure and inducement have so far failed to convince Somalia to discontinue the court case and settle it through direct negotiations. As Kenya ramps up its punitive diplomatic measures against its neighbour; Somalia continues to adopt a measured tone. Perhaps this assured entrenchment is rooted in Somalia's strong legal claim and defence, and as such, Somalia doesn't feel the need to escalate the tit-for-tat diplomatic war and, in the process, shoot itself in the foot.

Kenya, by now, is aware that its attempted arm-twisting tactics against Somalia seem to be counterproductive. There appears to be no sign of climbdown from Somalia in withdrawing from litigation. Moreover, Kenya's campaign of diplomatic pressure poses a real threat to the peace, prosperity and cooperation that both countries have enjoyed over the years. It's important for both countries to wait for the verdict of the ICJ without worsening the already complicated situation with diplomatic sabre-rattling.
Disclaimer: The viewpoints expressed by the authors do not necessarily reflect the opinions, viewpoints and editorial policies of TRT World.

We welcome all pitches and submissions to TRT World Opinion - please send them via email, to opinion.editorial@trtworld.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Kenya's carrot-and-stick approach to Somalia will not work

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
History has a strange habit of reversing roles. It was only yesterday when Somalia's irredentist quest of pan-Somali unification strategy cast an overarching shadow on the Horn of Africa; pressuring Kenya to relinquish the Somali-inhabited part of northeastern Kenya.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The use of the Ventis® Pro Series Gas Sensor eliminates the need for industry workers to carry multiple gas detection instruments at once, as these highly configurable gas sensors offer users with the ability to detect four or five gases, depending upon which sensor option has been chosen.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Paraguay: Mining, Minerals and Fuel Resources

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Paraguay is located to the north-east of Argentina in Central South America with a total area of 406,752 km 2 . It has a total population of 6,541,591 as per 2011 estimates. The climatic conditions of the country vary from subtropical to temperate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Info Print

Cite

Feedback

Share

Mining and quarrying

Paraguay has relatively few proven mineral resources, and most mineral deposits are found east of the Paraguay River. Manganese is located near Emboscada; malachite and azurite (copper ores) near Caapucú, Encarnación, and San Miguel; feldspar and mica near Concepción; and talc and piroflita (hard iron-bearing flagstone) near Caapucú and San Miguel. Ochre is found in the Cordillera region, and gypsum and limestone are found near the Paraguay River; there is some peat near Pilar. Copper, bauxite, iron, and uranium ores have been reported, and, beginning in the early 2000s, concessions were granted to companies for gold and diamond prospecting. Extensive drilling in the Paraguayan Chaco has failed to find any commercially viable hydrocarbons. Despite the varied mineral resources, mining and quarrying are among the least-developed economic activities. Because of the limited quantities of proven mineral reserves, there is quarrying of only limestone, gypsum, and clays, which are used mostly for construction.

Energy

Paraguay's most important natural resource is its hydroelectric potential. Most electricity in Paraguay came from wood- and oil-burning thermoelectric plants in Asunción until the Acaray hydroelectric power plant began operating in 1968. When the plant's capacity was expanded, Paraguay's total production increased more than 15-fold from 1970 to 1990. Nearly all of that increase came from hydroelectric sources. Distribution of electricity is controlled by the National Power Company, which was created in 1949.

A dramatic and far-reaching economic event in Paraguay's history was the construction, in partnership with Brazil, of the hydroelectric plant at Itaipú Dam on the Paraná, about 10 miles (16 km) north of the Friendship Bridge at Ciudad del Este. Itaipú Dam is one of the largest dams in the world and has one of the world's highest planned generating capacities. Work was completed in 1982 on the main gravity dam, 643 feet (196 metres) high and 4,045 feet (1,233 metres) long, spanning the Paraná. The reservoir created by the dam covers about 870 square miles (2,250 square km) of Paraguayan and Brazilian territory. The last of its many turbines was completed in 2007. At the beginning of the 21st century, many Paraguayans had begun to question the terms of the 1973 Treaty of Itaipú, believing that Brazil was not paying enough for the energy it was using. Under the treaty it had been agreed that Paraguay would own one-half of the electricity generated but that it would sell its excess power exclusively to Brazil at predetermined rates for 50 years. After several rounds of negotiation in 2009, Paraguay and Brazil reached an agreement on July 25 in which the Brazilian government agreed to triple the amount it paid for Paraguay's excess electricity. The deal also allowed Paraguay to sell electricity directly to the Brazilian market. A 2013 study commissioned by the Paraguayan government argued that Paraguay had effectively paid off its share of the outstanding debt for the Itaipú project through the subsidized sale of energy to the Brazilian grid.

The Yacyretá hydroelectric project, a joint Paraguayan-Argentine effort in the Yacyretá-Apipé islands zone of the Paraná, was established by a 1973 treaty. Its construction was hindered by delays, however, and the plant operated below capacity for many years because of lack of financing to complete the ancillary works. In 2004 Paraguay and Argentina reached an agreement to complete the necessary work so that the reservoir on the Paraná River, which was first filled in 1994, would reach its optimum depth and boost the dam's electricity-generation capacity. (That came about partly because Argentina had been experiencing energy shortages.) On February 25, 2011, Paraguayan Pres. Fernando Lugo and Argentine Pres. Cristina Fernández de Kirchner officially commemorated the completion of the Yacyretá project. Because domestic demand absorbs only a small percentage of the combined output of Itaipú and Yacyretá, Paraguay has become one of the world's largest exporters of electricity.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Paraguay - Paraguay - Resources and power: Paraguay has relatively few proven mineral resources, and most mineral deposits are found east of the Paraguay River. Manganese is located near Emboscada; malachite and azurite (copper ores) near Caapucú, Encarnación, and San Miguel; feldspar and mica near Concepción; and talc and piroflita (hard iron-bearing flagstone) near Caapucú and San Miguel.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Argentina's competitiveness matrix: the natural resource controversy and the country's evolving trade position

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This paper uses Fajnzylber and Mandeng's competitiveness matrix to analyse the evolving structure of Argentine exports between 1985 and 2010. In particular, it seeks to identify links between the country's export pattern, in which natural resources predominate, and the evolving structures of different markets: the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR), the developing countries of Asia and the world.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Ethiopia is a nation in the Horn of Africa region. Eritrea borders Ethiopia to the north while Somalia and Djibouti are located to the east of the state. Sudan and the recently formed state of South Sudan are to the west while the south of Ethiopia is bounded by Kenya.

Regarding geography, Ethiopia has varying features. For example, there is a section of raised plateaus between the border with Sudan and the basin of the Upper Nile. This region also has several mountains that make up the Ethiopian Highlands. Within the region, there are also other features such as plains at the bottom of the plateau and rivers such as the Blue Nile and the Awash River. The highest mountain in Ethiopia goes up to elevations of 14,872 feet.

Major Natural Resources In Ethiopia

The country has a few known reserves of precious metals and other natural resources such as gold, potash, natural gas, copper, and platinum. In addition to all these resources, there is also an extensive potential for the generation of hydropower.

However, the most abundant natural resource is arguably natural gas. Explorations in the past have shown that Ethiopia has some of the largest deposits of natural gas compared to most countries in Africa. Despite all this potential, natural gas has not been properly exploited yet. The potential is so high that the geology of some parts of the country, like that of the Ogaden basin, resembles the natural gas-rich geological structures of oil and gas fields in the Middle East.

In addition to the above resources, Ethiopia also engages in a bit of agriculture. As things stand, about 20% is being exploited for agricultural use even though the potential is higher. Forests have greatly reduced with only about 10 to 15% of the land covered by forests. Livestock keeping is also popular with huge swathes of land used for pasture.

Plants To Utilize Ethiopia's Natural Resources

In recent years, the Ethiopian government has taken progressive steps to ensure that the valuable resource does not go untapped for much longer. For instance, a plan has been prepared that, if fulfilled, would see the extensive exploitation of the resource by 2023. The idea is to turn the sector into a crucial cog of the Ethiopian economy by then. Some of the strategies put in place to ensure the goal is reached include inviting more private investors to the country and the issuance of licenses to parties interested in the mining sector. The Ethiopian Petroleum Development Enterprise was established in 2012 to oversee the achievement of the set targets. Plenty of firms have already acquired the necessary permits to explore the vast deposits of gas and associated liquids.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Are The Major Natural Resources Of Ethiopia?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Ethiopia is a nation in the Horn of Africa region. Eritrea borders Ethiopia to the north while Somalia and Djibouti are located to the east of the state. Sudan and the recently formed state of South Sudan are to the west while the south of Ethiopia is bounded by Kenya.