y Ak6#y1#r;ת_72sEcޓ<
ќݵYǃQP0AEԘZ,(t¨Us8oxvG6
2025-01-08 2025 European Cup y Ak6#y1#r;ת_72sEcޓ<
ќݵYǃQP0AEԘZ,(t¨Us8oxvG6
y Ak6#y1#r;ת_72sEcޓ<
ќݵYǃQP0AEԘZ,(t¨Us8oxvG6 VPS: New Managing Director for the Americas
Children of the wealthy and connected get special admissions consideration at some elite U.S. universities, according to new filings in a class-action lawsuit originally brought against 17 schools. Georgetown’s then-president, for example, listed a prospective student on his “president’s list” after meeting her and her wealthy father at an Idaho conference known as “summer camp for billionaires,” according to Tuesday court filings in the price-fixing lawsuit filed in Chicago federal court in 2022. Although it’s always been assumed that such favoritism exists, the filings offer a rare peek at the often secret deliberations of university heads and admissions officials. They show how schools admit otherwise unqualified wealthy children because their parents have connections and could possibly donate large sums down the line, raising questions about fairness. Stuart Schmill, the dean of admissions at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, wrote in a 2018 email that the university admitted four out of six applicants recommended by then-board chairman Robert Millard, including two who “we would really not have otherwise admitted.” The two others were not admitted because they were “not in the ball park, or the push from him was not as strong.” In the email, Schmill said Millard was careful to play down his influence on admissions decisions, but he said the chair also sent notes on all six students and later met with Schmill to share insight “into who he thought was more of a priority.” The filings are the latest salvo in a lawsuit that claims that 17 of the nation’s most prestigious colleges colluded to reduce the competition for prospective students and drive down the amount of financial aid they would offer, all while giving special preference to the children of wealthy donors. “That illegal collusion resulted in the defendants providing far less aid to students than would have been provided in a free market,” said Robert Gilbert, an attorney for the plaintiffs. Since the lawsuit was filed, 10 of the schools have reached settlements to pay out a total of $284 million, including payments of up to $2,000 to current or former students whose financial aid might have been shortchanged over a period of more than two decades. They are Brown, the University of Chicago, Columbia, Dartmouth, Duke, Emory, Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt and Yale. Johns Hopkins is working on a settlement and the six schools still fighting the lawsuit are the California Institute of Technology, Cornell, Georgetown, MIT, Notre Dame and the University of Pennsylvania. MIT called the lawsuit and the claims about admissions favoritism baseless. “MIT has no history of wealth favoritism in its admissions; quite the opposite,” university spokesperson Kimberly Allen said. “After years of discovery in which millions of documents were produced that provide an overwhelming record of independence in our admissions process, plaintiffs could cite just a single instance in which the recommendation of a board member helped sway the decisions for two undergraduate applicants." In a statement, Penn also said the case is meritless that the evidence shows that it doesn't favor students whose families have donated or pledged money to the Ivy League school. “Plaintiffs’ whole case is an attempt to embarrass the University about its purported admission practices on issues totally unrelated to this case," the school said. Notre Dame officials also called the case baseless. “We are confident that every student admitted to Notre Dame is fully qualified and ready to succeed,” a university spokesperson said in a statement. The South Bend, Indiana, school, though, did apparently admit wealthy students with subpar academic backgrounds. According to the new court filings, Don Bishop, who was then associate vice president for enrollment at Notre Dame, bluntly wrote about the “special interest” admits in a 2012 email, saying that year's crop had poorer academic records than the previous year's. The 2012 group included 38 applicants who were given a “very low” academic rating, Bishop wrote. He said those students represented “massive allowances to the power of the family connections and funding history,” adding that “we allowed their high gifting or potential gifting to influence our choices more this year than last year.” The final line of his email: “Sure hope the wealthy next year raise a few more smart kids!” Some of the examples pointed to in this week's court filings showed that just being able to pay full tuition would give students an advantage. During a deposition, a former Vanderbilt admissions director said that in some cases, a student would get an edge on the waitlist if they didn’t need financial aid. The 17 schools were part of a decades-old group that got permission from Congress to come up with a shared approach to awarding financial aid. Such an arrangement might otherwise violate antitrust laws, but Congress allowed it as long as the colleges all had need-blind admissions policies, meaning they wouldn't consider a student’s financial situation when deciding who gets in. The lawsuit argues that many colleges claimed to be need-blind but routinely favored the children of alumni and donors. In doing so, the suit says, the colleges violated the Congressional exemption and tainted the entire organization. The group dissolved in recent years when the provision allowing the collaboration expired. The Associated Press’ education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org .49ers RBs Christian McCaffrey, Jordan Mason placed on IR
NEW YORK (AP) — Walmart's sweeping rollback of its diversity policies is the strongest indication yet of a profound shift taking hold at U.S. companies that are revaluating the legal and political risks associated with bold programs to bolster historically underrepresented groups in business. The changes announced by the world's biggest retailer followed a string of legal victories by conservative groups that have filed an onslaught of lawsuits challenging corporate and federal programs aimed at elevating minority and women-owned businesses and employees. The risk associated with some of programs crystalized with the election of former President Donald Trump, whose administration is certain to make dismantling diversity, equity and inclusion programs a priority. Trump's incoming deputy chief of policy will be his former adviser Stephen Miller , who leads a group called America First Legal that has aggressively challenged corporate DEI policies. “There has been a lot of reassessment of risk looking at programs that could be deemed to constitute reverse discrimination,” said Allan Schweyer, principal researcher the Human Capital Center at the Conference Board. “This is another domino to fall and it is a rather large domino,” he added. Among other changes, Walmart said it will no longer give priority treatment to suppliers owned by women or minorities. The company also will not renew a five-year commitment for a racial equity center set up in 2020 after the police killing of George Floyd. And it pulled out of a prominent gay rights index . Schweyer said the biggest trigger for companies making such changes is simply a reassessment of their legal risk exposure, which began after U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in June 2023 that ended affirmative action in college admissions. Since then, conservative groups using similar arguments have secured court victories against various diversity programs, especially those that steer contracts to minority or women-owned businesses. Most recently, the conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty won a victory in a case against the U.S. Department of Transportation over its use of a program that gives priority to minority-owned businesses when it awards contracts. Companies are seeing a big legal risk in continuing with DEI efforts, said Dan Lennington, a deputy counsel at the institute. His organization says it has identified more than 60 programs in the federal government that it considers discriminatory, he said. “We have a legal landscape within the entire federal government, all three branches -- the U.S. Supreme Court, the Congress and the President -- are all now firmly pointed in the direction towards equality of individuals and individualized treatment of all Americans, instead of diversity, equity and inclusion treating people as members of racial groups,” Lennington said. The Trump administration is also likely to take direct aim at DEI initiatives through executive orders and other policies that affect private companies, especially federal contractors. “The impact of the election on DEI policies is huge. It can’t be overstated,” said Jason Schwartz, co-chair of the Labor & Employment Practice Group at law firm Gibson Dunn. With Miller returning to the White House, rolling back DEI initiatives is likely to be a priority, Schwartz said. “Companies are trying to strike the right balance to make clear they’ve got an inclusive workplace where everyone is welcome, and they want to get the best talent, while at the same time trying not to alienate various parts of their employees and customer base who might feel one way or the other. It’s a virtually impossible dilemma,” Schwartz said. A recent survey by Pew Research Center showed that workers are divided on the merits of DEI policies. While still broadly popular, the share of workers who said focusing on workplace diversity was mostly a good thing fell to 52% in the November survey, compared to 56% in a similar survey in February 2023. Rachel Minkin, a research associated at Pew called it a small but significant shift in short amount of time. There will be more companies pulling back from their DEI policies, but it likely won’t be a retreat across the board, said David Glasgow, executive director of the Meltzer Center for Diversity, Inclusion and Belonging at New York University. “There are vastly more companies that are sticking with DEI," Glasgow said. "The only reason you don’t hear about it is most of them are doing it by stealth. They’re putting their heads down and doing DEI work and hoping not to attract attention.” Glasgow advises organizations to stick to their own core values, because attitudes toward the topic can change quickly in the span of four years. “It’s going to leave them looking a little bit weak if there’s a kind of flip-flopping, depending on whichever direction the political winds are blowing,” he said. One reason DEI programs exist is because without those programs, companies may be vulnerable to lawsuits for traditional discrimination. “Really think carefully about the risks in all directions on this topic,” Glasgow said. Walmart confirmed will no longer consider race and gender as a litmus test to improve diversity when it offers supplier contracts. Last fiscal year, Walmart said it spent more than $13 billion on minority, women or veteran-owned good and service suppliers. It was unclear how its relationships with such business would change going forward. Organizations that that have partnered with Walmart on its diversity initiatives offered a cautious response. The Women’s Business Enterprise National Council, a non-profit that last year named Walmart one of America's top corporation for women-owned enterprises, said it was still evaluating the impact of Walmart's announcement. Pamela Prince-Eason, the president and CEO of the organization, said she hoped Walmart's need to cater to its diverse customer base will continue to drive contracts to women-owned suppliers even if the company no longer has explicit dollar goals. “I suspect Walmart will continue to have one of the most inclusive supply chains in the World,” Prince-Eason wrote. “Any retailer's ability to serve the communities they operate in will continue to value understanding their customers, (many of which are women), in order to better provide products and services desired and no one understands customers better than Walmart." Walmart's announcement came after the company spoke directly with conservative political commentator and activist Robby Starbuck, who has been going after corporate DEI policies, calling out individual companies on the social media platform X. Several of those companies have subsequently announced that they are pulling back their initiatives, including Ford , Harley-Davidson, Lowe’s and Tractor Supply . Walmart confirmed to The Associated Press that it will better monitor its third-party marketplace items to make sure they don’t feature sexual and transgender products aimed at minors. The company also will stop participating in the Human Rights Campaign’s annual benchmark index that measures workplace inclusion for LGBTQ+ employees. A Walmart spokesperson added that some of the changes were already in progress and not as a result of conversations that it had with Starbuck. RaShawn “Shawnie” Hawkins, senior director of the HRC Foundation’s Workplace Equality Program, said companies that “abandon” their commitments workplace inclusion policies “are shirking their responsibility to their employees, consumers, and shareholders.” He said the buying power of LGBTQ customers is powerful and noted that the index will have “record participation” of more than 1,400 companies in 2025." Alexandra Olson And Cathy Bussewitz, The Associated PressAlberta NDP concerned postal strike plan could hinder upcoming byelection
Cardinals are average through 12 games and the frustration is it feels as if they could be betterINDIANAPOLIS (AP) — There's more than just school pride and bragging rights to all that bellyaching over who might be in and who might be out of college football 's first 12-team playoff. Try the more than $115 million that will be spread across the conferences at the end of the season, all depending on who gets in and which teams go the farthest. According to the College Football Playoff website , the 12 teams simply making the bracket earn their conferences $4 million each. Another $4 million goes to conferences whose teams get into the quarterfinals. Then, there's $6 million more for teams that make the semifinals and another $6 million for those who play for the title. Most of this bonanza comes courtesy of ESPN, which is forking over $1.3 billion a year to televise the new postseason. A lot of that money is already earmarked — more goes to the Big Ten and Southeastern Conference than the Big 12 or Atlantic Coast — but a lot is up for grabs in the 11 games that will play out between the opening round on Dec. 20 and the final on Jan. 20. In all, the teams that make the title game will bring $20 million to their conferences, all of which distribute that money, along with billions in TV revenue and other sources, in different ways. In fiscal 2022-23, the Big Ten, for instance, reported revenue of nearly $880 million and distributed about $60.5 million to most of its members. The massive stakes might help explain the unabashed lobbying coming from some corners of the football world, as the tension grows in advance of Sunday's final rankings, which will set the bracket. Earlier this week, Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark lit into the selection committee, which doesn't have a single team higher than 15 in the rankings. That does two things: It positions the Big 12 as a one-bid league, and also threatens to makes its champion — either Arizona State or Iowa State — the fifth-best among conference titlists that get automatic bids. Only the top four of those get byes, which could cost the Big 12 a spot in the quarterfinals — or $4 million. “The committee continues to show time and time again that they are paying attention to logos versus resumes,” Yormark said this week, while slamming the idea of teams with two losses in his conference being ranked worse than teams with three in the SEC. The ACC is also staring at a one-bid season with only No. 8 SMU inside the cut line of this week's projected bracket. Miami's loss last week all but bumped the Hurricanes out of the playoffs, a snub that ACC commissioner Jim Phillips said left him “incredibly shocked and disappointed." “As we look ahead to the final rankings, we hope the committee will reconsider and put a deserving Miami in the field," Phillips said in a statement. The lobbying and bickering filters down to the campuses that feel the impact. And, of course, to social media. One of the most entertaining episodes came earlier this week when athletic directors at Iowa State and SMU went back and forth about whose team was more deserving. There are a few stray millions that the selection committee cannot really influence, including a $3 million payment to conferences that make the playoff. In a reminder that all these kids are going to school, after all, the conferences get $300,000 per football team that meets academic requirements to participate in the postseason. (That's basically everyone). Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here . AP college football: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-football-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/college-football: Dr T.M. Balakrishnan Nair, director of the city-based Incois, said that the ocean held the key to mitigating disasters and unlocking sustainable economic growth. He highlighted the role of advanced technologies and predictive modelling in reducing the risks posed by natural disasters. As part of the India Meteorological Department’s 150th-anniversary celebrations, Dr Nair spoke about how real-time oceanographic data, wave forecasting, and storm surge predictions empower coastal communities and industries to prepare for environmental challenges. The lecture, ‘Ocean services for disaster risk reduction and blue economy,’ shed light on the initiatives of Incois (Indian National Centre for Ocean Information Services) in transforming research into actionable insights for disaster mitigation and economic resilience. The event also tied into the five-day international workshop ‘Empowering the Next Wave of Indian Ocean Prediction’, which began on December 9, featuring experts from South Africa, Brazil, Malaysia, and India.
Cowboys star G Zack Martin doubtful to play vs. Commanders
SFA partnership advances carbon capture tech, provides scholarships
Preview: NEC vs. FC Utrecht - prediction, team news, lineupsWeek 12 TNF: Steelers-Browns Preview, Props & PredictionKatie Miller successfully opposed sending condolences to Trayvon Martin’s parents while at university, and in 2020 defended Trump’s ‘zero-tolerance policy’, which infamously led to family separation Stephen Miller and his wife Katie are recognised as one of the most prominent couples within the Maga movement. Elle magazine in March 2020 called Katie “a poster child for Trump’s America”, while in August of the same year, Vanity Fair described the Millers as “Trump’s favourite young power couple” – beyond those involving his own children ( Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump , Donald Trump Jr and Kimberly Guilfoyle). {"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"ImageObject","caption":"Stephen Miller with Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump on election night in 2016. Photo: @StephenM/X","url":"https://img.i-scmp.com/cdn-cgi/image/fit=contain,width=1024,format=auto/sites/default/files/d8/images/canvas/2024/12/05/fd76350b-8413-46bf-9d7c-0cdca3616a00_5392e2c6.jpg"} Stephen Miller with Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump on election night in 2016. Photo: @StephenM/X Now, with president-elect Donald Trump securing key positions in his new administration as he returns to power, Stephen Miller is back in the spotlight, having been named homeland security adviser and deputy chief of staff for policy. Miller was behind some of Trump’s most controversial immigration policies, including the family separation programme during his first term in office. Advertisement Time magazine predicts that Miller will take centre stage in the new administration, with much of Trump’s 2024 election campaign built on promises of mass deportations. As for his wife – a seasoned press secretary who has also been outspoken about migrants – Katie Miller has been all over social media advocating for team Maga. But what do we know about her? Katie Miller’s rise to power {"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"ImageObject","caption":"Katie Miller with then-vice-president Mike Pence. Photo: @katierosemiller/X","url":"https://img.i-scmp.com/cdn-cgi/image/fit=contain,width=1024,format=auto/sites/default/files/d8/images/canvas/2024/12/05/c9aae53d-57b1-40aa-b1b8-b18989d0b39e_d4ad561b.jpg"} Katie Miller with then-vice-president Mike Pence. Photo: @katierosemiller/X Katie Miller née Waldman’s rise to the upper echelons of the White House has been speedy. Per Vanity Fair, after graduating from the University of Florida in 2014, she became a press assistant for the National Republican Senatorial Committee. She later served variously as deputy press secretary, press secretary and communications director, per Newsweek, ultimately becoming press secretary to former vice-president Mike Pence in 2019. She’s politically ambitious {"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"ImageObject","caption":"“Forever thankful for the Trump-Pence administration – because of the last four years, we became a family of three,” Katie Miller wrote on X (formerly Twitter) in January 2021. Photo: @katierosemiller/X","url":"https://img.i-scmp.com/cdn-cgi/image/fit=contain,width=1024,format=auto/sites/default/files/d8/images/canvas/2024/12/05/a80f63e0-a9d9-4bb7-88d6-587e5a127f7f_e9162a66.jpg"} “Forever thankful for the Trump-Pence administration – because of the last four years, we became a family of three,” Katie Miller wrote on X (formerly Twitter) in January 2021. Photo: @katierosemiller/X Katie Miller graduated from the University of Florida and went on to receive a master’s degree in public administration from George Washington University. Some of her former college classmates told Vanity Fair that Miller has always been driven by political ambition. “The only thing she loves or values in this world is power. Anyone she attaches to in her life is simply a pawn to feed her addiction to it,” commented one person.Origin co-founder, John Bissell at the Origin Materials 1 biomaterials pilot plant in Sarnia, ... [+] Ontario, Canada. Plastics are essential to modern life, but their convenience comes at a steep environmental cost. They are made by distilling mined hydrocarbons in a refinery—a process that releases carbon dioxide and other pollutants. Many plastics are used only once, after which they accumulate in landfills, make their way into rivers and oceans, and disturb marine food chains . Recent studies have found that microplastics also make their way into breast milk , suggesting they are an unfortunate component of human food chains as well. The negative environmental impacts of conventionally manufactured plastics are what makes biomaterials such a hot topic. Origin Materials’ (ORGN) has developed a truly revolutionary insight into this hot topic: its scientists have found a way to produce common plastics and other materials using a feedstock of biomaterials like wood chips, cardboard, and sawdust. In the process of bringing this revolutionary innovation to life, Origin’s scientists stumbled onto a second good idea, one which is less revolutionary but has the advantage of being immediately cash flow generative: a novel manufacturing process that increases the recyclability of single-use plastic containers. The potential climate impact of Origin’s biomaterials technology is astounding. Rearranging hydrogen and carbon atoms to produce common plastics like PET (a type of plastic used to produce everything from drink bottles to synthetic fabric) means that not as much oil must be extracted from underground. Origin’s manufacturing advance enhances plastic recycling, reducing the amount of oil refined into plastic. Other biomaterials companies try to process organic waste to mimic the capabilities of the materials we use in everyday life, an approach that typically results in inferior materials that fall apart too easily, cannot withstand extreme temperatures, etc. In contrast, Origin can create the very same plastics and materials we use every day without further unbalancing the planet’s carbon cycle. FBI Warns iPhone And Android Users—Stop Sending Texts Microsoft’s New Update—Bad News Confirmed For 400 Million Windows Users Smartphone Security Warning—Make These Changes Now Or Become A Victim Operationalizing such a revolutionary innovation isn’t easy, and Origin shareholders have had a rough ride. The company announced several years of delays in constructing its first large-scale commercial plant, leading to a gut-wrenching fall in share price over just a few harrowing trading sessions. Origin's stock price took a greater than 60% hit after management announced significant delays to ... [+] the construction of its large-scale commercial biomaterials plant, OM2, in the third quarter of 2023. Origin’s management, to its credit, scrambled to pivot to a partnership model that would allow it to fund a large-scale commercial plant with less of its own capital and harnessed its plastics chemistry expertise to launch a cash-generative recycling-related business to preserve cash on its balance sheet and avoid the threat of delisting. Origin’s biomaterials technology transforms wood scraps into real plastic Founded in 2008 by John Bissell and Ryan Smith, Origin Materials has pioneered a technology based on CMF (chloromethyl furfural), a new chemical platform created from a feedstock of lignocellulosic biomass (anything made from crushed, cut, or chipped wood). Origin’s new chemical platform enables the production of plastics like PET and other industrial chemicals identical to those derived from hydrocarbons without the environmental impacts of oil extraction and refining. The company believes that, depending on the energy mix of the grid from which a large-scale commercial Origin facility draws power, the company can produce plastics that have very low or even negative carbon footprints without resorting to CCS (please see my series on CCS to learn more about this controversial technology). The market size for the suite of products Origin can produce is astounding—trillions of dollars per year. Origin Materials' biomaterials platform uses CMF as its "trunk", from which various products, ... [+] including PET plastics, nylons, epoxies, and many other basic chemicals can be manufactured. While the company scrambled to find capital partners to help fund the construction of a commercial-scale biomaterials plant, Origin’s management realized that its research into the chemistry of PET enabled it to do something no other firm had been able to do at commercial scale: produce bottle caps made out of PET. Thus, Origin’s secondary product line was born: the “caps and closures” business, which sells caps to large drink companies and licenses its unique technology to other caps and closures manufacturers. The ability to produce PET caps confers a big advantage in plastics recycling, and this niche market is worth $65 billion annually. While the caps and closures business has neither the impact nor the market size of its biomaterials platform, the promise of decent near-term cash flow from this niche did provide the impetus for Origin’s stock price to rise above $1 per share, saving management from having to use a “reverse split” to prevent the stock from being delisted. Origin’s caps and closures technology, though not as sexy as its biomaterials tech, makes plastic recycling easier and is cash generative When different types of plastics are melted together in the recycling process, impurities in the resultant compound plastic reduce its usability. Recycling plastics of a uniform type is much more effective and has less impact on the climate. Plastic bottles are made primarily from PET, while caps are made from other plastics—polypropylene and HDPE—which can be recycled on their own but can’t be recycled together with PET. Consumer product goods companies like PepsiCo faced a quandary earlier this year when the EU mandated that caps must be tethered to bottles. They had to follow this regulatory mandate while demonstrating they are doing all they can to increase recyclability, even as HDPE/PP caps cannot be recycled with PET bottles. Origin’s PET manufacturing technology helps CPG companies by enabling caps and bottles to be made from the same material, improving both recycling efficiency and recycled product quality. As more plastic can be recycled, less oil must be dug up and refined into plastic. Origin has made substantial strides in the caps and closures business this year, completing manufacturing trials, forming partnerships with equipment manufacturers, and announcing their ability to produce tethered caps a month before the EU deadline. In August, the company signed a memorandum of understanding with an unnamed client for PET caps estimated by Origin’s management to be worth $100 million over the next two years. Revenue from this contract will begin in 2025, the company announced, with higher projected sales in 2026. At its 3Q24 earnings announcement, the company provided a bit more color to the $100 million contract and reaffirmed its full-2024 guidance to generate revenues between $25 million and $35 million and hold full-year net cash burn between $55 million and $65 million. I will be posting a separate report on Origin’s third-quarter earnings in the Climate Tech Venture Review, so I won’t rehash the announcement here. While I am most excited about the future of Origin’s biomaterials platform, I am impressed at its nimble and creative strategic adaptation in the face of a major setback. By pivoting to a cash-generative model with caps and closures and establishing strategic partnerships to reduce capital expenditures in its biomaterials business, Origin has taken the necessary steps to realize its vision of plastics made from wood waste. Despite its investment uncertainties, Origin’s biomaterials technology is so compelling and its leadership has displayed such grit that it cannot be ignored. Intelligent investors take note.
Bureau Veritas Marine & Offshore (BV), a world leader in testing, inspection, and certification, is partnering with Samsung Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. (SHI), a leading global shipbuilding and offshore engineering company, to develop Floating CO2 Storage Units (FCSU) and Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) projects in the Republic of Korea, with the aim to significantly reduce green house gas emissions. The collaboration will center on validating and certifying cutting-edge CCS technologies that are cost-effective and sustainable. By blending BV’s renowned certification expertise with SHI’s innovative, market-leading technology, this partnership aims to set new industry standards and accelerate the deployment of CCS solutions that can drive a greener, more efficient future. BV and SHI will also collaborate on pilot projects to test the commercial potential of CCS technologies. BV will use its certification expertise to handle technical reviews and independent risk assessments. Additionally, they will conduct environmental studies and develop risk management plans to ensure the safety and sustainability of CCS projects. Representatives from Bureau Veritas Marine & Offshore and Samsung Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. Alex Gregg-Smith, Senior Vice President, Asia Pacific (APA) at Bureau Veritas Marine & Offshore said: “Our partnership with SHI is an important step in our efforts to support the deployment of innovative carbon capture and storage technologies. By combining our expertise, we aim to advance the commercialization of FCSU and CCS solutions, which are critical for achieving global climate goals.” Mr. Haeki Jang, Chief Technology Officer, Samsung Heavy Industries Co., Ltd., said: “This collaboration marks a significant step towards realizing our vision of a sustainable future. By leveraging the strengths of both SHI and BV, we are committed to accelerating the deployment of carbon capture and storage solutions that meet the evolving demands of the global maritime and offshore industries. Together, we aim to contribute to a cleaner, more sustainable world through the development of advanced CCS technologies.” Source: Bureau Veritas
-
Previous:
-
Next: pRvk#Y
c0hb^uyc(B@ w6Z0)0 كra wa3pbl8O¬*v؛Y'">̂w`K~==a,-0C.6
y Ak6#y1#r;ת_72sEcޓ<
ќݵYǃQP0AEԘZ,(t¨Us8oxvG6 VPS: New Managing Director for the Americas
Children of the wealthy and connected get special admissions consideration at some elite U.S. universities, according to new filings in a class-action lawsuit originally brought against 17 schools. Georgetown’s then-president, for example, listed a prospective student on his “president’s list” after meeting her and her wealthy father at an Idaho conference known as “summer camp for billionaires,” according to Tuesday court filings in the price-fixing lawsuit filed in Chicago federal court in 2022. Although it’s always been assumed that such favoritism exists, the filings offer a rare peek at the often secret deliberations of university heads and admissions officials. They show how schools admit otherwise unqualified wealthy children because their parents have connections and could possibly donate large sums down the line, raising questions about fairness. Stuart Schmill, the dean of admissions at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, wrote in a 2018 email that the university admitted four out of six applicants recommended by then-board chairman Robert Millard, including two who “we would really not have otherwise admitted.” The two others were not admitted because they were “not in the ball park, or the push from him was not as strong.” In the email, Schmill said Millard was careful to play down his influence on admissions decisions, but he said the chair also sent notes on all six students and later met with Schmill to share insight “into who he thought was more of a priority.” The filings are the latest salvo in a lawsuit that claims that 17 of the nation’s most prestigious colleges colluded to reduce the competition for prospective students and drive down the amount of financial aid they would offer, all while giving special preference to the children of wealthy donors. “That illegal collusion resulted in the defendants providing far less aid to students than would have been provided in a free market,” said Robert Gilbert, an attorney for the plaintiffs. Since the lawsuit was filed, 10 of the schools have reached settlements to pay out a total of $284 million, including payments of up to $2,000 to current or former students whose financial aid might have been shortchanged over a period of more than two decades. They are Brown, the University of Chicago, Columbia, Dartmouth, Duke, Emory, Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt and Yale. Johns Hopkins is working on a settlement and the six schools still fighting the lawsuit are the California Institute of Technology, Cornell, Georgetown, MIT, Notre Dame and the University of Pennsylvania. MIT called the lawsuit and the claims about admissions favoritism baseless. “MIT has no history of wealth favoritism in its admissions; quite the opposite,” university spokesperson Kimberly Allen said. “After years of discovery in which millions of documents were produced that provide an overwhelming record of independence in our admissions process, plaintiffs could cite just a single instance in which the recommendation of a board member helped sway the decisions for two undergraduate applicants." In a statement, Penn also said the case is meritless that the evidence shows that it doesn't favor students whose families have donated or pledged money to the Ivy League school. “Plaintiffs’ whole case is an attempt to embarrass the University about its purported admission practices on issues totally unrelated to this case," the school said. Notre Dame officials also called the case baseless. “We are confident that every student admitted to Notre Dame is fully qualified and ready to succeed,” a university spokesperson said in a statement. The South Bend, Indiana, school, though, did apparently admit wealthy students with subpar academic backgrounds. According to the new court filings, Don Bishop, who was then associate vice president for enrollment at Notre Dame, bluntly wrote about the “special interest” admits in a 2012 email, saying that year's crop had poorer academic records than the previous year's. The 2012 group included 38 applicants who were given a “very low” academic rating, Bishop wrote. He said those students represented “massive allowances to the power of the family connections and funding history,” adding that “we allowed their high gifting or potential gifting to influence our choices more this year than last year.” The final line of his email: “Sure hope the wealthy next year raise a few more smart kids!” Some of the examples pointed to in this week's court filings showed that just being able to pay full tuition would give students an advantage. During a deposition, a former Vanderbilt admissions director said that in some cases, a student would get an edge on the waitlist if they didn’t need financial aid. The 17 schools were part of a decades-old group that got permission from Congress to come up with a shared approach to awarding financial aid. Such an arrangement might otherwise violate antitrust laws, but Congress allowed it as long as the colleges all had need-blind admissions policies, meaning they wouldn't consider a student’s financial situation when deciding who gets in. The lawsuit argues that many colleges claimed to be need-blind but routinely favored the children of alumni and donors. In doing so, the suit says, the colleges violated the Congressional exemption and tainted the entire organization. The group dissolved in recent years when the provision allowing the collaboration expired. The Associated Press’ education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org .49ers RBs Christian McCaffrey, Jordan Mason placed on IR
NEW YORK (AP) — Walmart's sweeping rollback of its diversity policies is the strongest indication yet of a profound shift taking hold at U.S. companies that are revaluating the legal and political risks associated with bold programs to bolster historically underrepresented groups in business. The changes announced by the world's biggest retailer followed a string of legal victories by conservative groups that have filed an onslaught of lawsuits challenging corporate and federal programs aimed at elevating minority and women-owned businesses and employees. The risk associated with some of programs crystalized with the election of former President Donald Trump, whose administration is certain to make dismantling diversity, equity and inclusion programs a priority. Trump's incoming deputy chief of policy will be his former adviser Stephen Miller , who leads a group called America First Legal that has aggressively challenged corporate DEI policies. “There has been a lot of reassessment of risk looking at programs that could be deemed to constitute reverse discrimination,” said Allan Schweyer, principal researcher the Human Capital Center at the Conference Board. “This is another domino to fall and it is a rather large domino,” he added. Among other changes, Walmart said it will no longer give priority treatment to suppliers owned by women or minorities. The company also will not renew a five-year commitment for a racial equity center set up in 2020 after the police killing of George Floyd. And it pulled out of a prominent gay rights index . Schweyer said the biggest trigger for companies making such changes is simply a reassessment of their legal risk exposure, which began after U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in June 2023 that ended affirmative action in college admissions. Since then, conservative groups using similar arguments have secured court victories against various diversity programs, especially those that steer contracts to minority or women-owned businesses. Most recently, the conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty won a victory in a case against the U.S. Department of Transportation over its use of a program that gives priority to minority-owned businesses when it awards contracts. Companies are seeing a big legal risk in continuing with DEI efforts, said Dan Lennington, a deputy counsel at the institute. His organization says it has identified more than 60 programs in the federal government that it considers discriminatory, he said. “We have a legal landscape within the entire federal government, all three branches -- the U.S. Supreme Court, the Congress and the President -- are all now firmly pointed in the direction towards equality of individuals and individualized treatment of all Americans, instead of diversity, equity and inclusion treating people as members of racial groups,” Lennington said. The Trump administration is also likely to take direct aim at DEI initiatives through executive orders and other policies that affect private companies, especially federal contractors. “The impact of the election on DEI policies is huge. It can’t be overstated,” said Jason Schwartz, co-chair of the Labor & Employment Practice Group at law firm Gibson Dunn. With Miller returning to the White House, rolling back DEI initiatives is likely to be a priority, Schwartz said. “Companies are trying to strike the right balance to make clear they’ve got an inclusive workplace where everyone is welcome, and they want to get the best talent, while at the same time trying not to alienate various parts of their employees and customer base who might feel one way or the other. It’s a virtually impossible dilemma,” Schwartz said. A recent survey by Pew Research Center showed that workers are divided on the merits of DEI policies. While still broadly popular, the share of workers who said focusing on workplace diversity was mostly a good thing fell to 52% in the November survey, compared to 56% in a similar survey in February 2023. Rachel Minkin, a research associated at Pew called it a small but significant shift in short amount of time. There will be more companies pulling back from their DEI policies, but it likely won’t be a retreat across the board, said David Glasgow, executive director of the Meltzer Center for Diversity, Inclusion and Belonging at New York University. “There are vastly more companies that are sticking with DEI," Glasgow said. "The only reason you don’t hear about it is most of them are doing it by stealth. They’re putting their heads down and doing DEI work and hoping not to attract attention.” Glasgow advises organizations to stick to their own core values, because attitudes toward the topic can change quickly in the span of four years. “It’s going to leave them looking a little bit weak if there’s a kind of flip-flopping, depending on whichever direction the political winds are blowing,” he said. One reason DEI programs exist is because without those programs, companies may be vulnerable to lawsuits for traditional discrimination. “Really think carefully about the risks in all directions on this topic,” Glasgow said. Walmart confirmed will no longer consider race and gender as a litmus test to improve diversity when it offers supplier contracts. Last fiscal year, Walmart said it spent more than $13 billion on minority, women or veteran-owned good and service suppliers. It was unclear how its relationships with such business would change going forward. Organizations that that have partnered with Walmart on its diversity initiatives offered a cautious response. The Women’s Business Enterprise National Council, a non-profit that last year named Walmart one of America's top corporation for women-owned enterprises, said it was still evaluating the impact of Walmart's announcement. Pamela Prince-Eason, the president and CEO of the organization, said she hoped Walmart's need to cater to its diverse customer base will continue to drive contracts to women-owned suppliers even if the company no longer has explicit dollar goals. “I suspect Walmart will continue to have one of the most inclusive supply chains in the World,” Prince-Eason wrote. “Any retailer's ability to serve the communities they operate in will continue to value understanding their customers, (many of which are women), in order to better provide products and services desired and no one understands customers better than Walmart." Walmart's announcement came after the company spoke directly with conservative political commentator and activist Robby Starbuck, who has been going after corporate DEI policies, calling out individual companies on the social media platform X. Several of those companies have subsequently announced that they are pulling back their initiatives, including Ford , Harley-Davidson, Lowe’s and Tractor Supply . Walmart confirmed to The Associated Press that it will better monitor its third-party marketplace items to make sure they don’t feature sexual and transgender products aimed at minors. The company also will stop participating in the Human Rights Campaign’s annual benchmark index that measures workplace inclusion for LGBTQ+ employees. A Walmart spokesperson added that some of the changes were already in progress and not as a result of conversations that it had with Starbuck. RaShawn “Shawnie” Hawkins, senior director of the HRC Foundation’s Workplace Equality Program, said companies that “abandon” their commitments workplace inclusion policies “are shirking their responsibility to their employees, consumers, and shareholders.” He said the buying power of LGBTQ customers is powerful and noted that the index will have “record participation” of more than 1,400 companies in 2025." Alexandra Olson And Cathy Bussewitz, The Associated PressAlberta NDP concerned postal strike plan could hinder upcoming byelection
Cardinals are average through 12 games and the frustration is it feels as if they could be betterINDIANAPOLIS (AP) — There's more than just school pride and bragging rights to all that bellyaching over who might be in and who might be out of college football 's first 12-team playoff. Try the more than $115 million that will be spread across the conferences at the end of the season, all depending on who gets in and which teams go the farthest. According to the College Football Playoff website , the 12 teams simply making the bracket earn their conferences $4 million each. Another $4 million goes to conferences whose teams get into the quarterfinals. Then, there's $6 million more for teams that make the semifinals and another $6 million for those who play for the title. Most of this bonanza comes courtesy of ESPN, which is forking over $1.3 billion a year to televise the new postseason. A lot of that money is already earmarked — more goes to the Big Ten and Southeastern Conference than the Big 12 or Atlantic Coast — but a lot is up for grabs in the 11 games that will play out between the opening round on Dec. 20 and the final on Jan. 20. In all, the teams that make the title game will bring $20 million to their conferences, all of which distribute that money, along with billions in TV revenue and other sources, in different ways. In fiscal 2022-23, the Big Ten, for instance, reported revenue of nearly $880 million and distributed about $60.5 million to most of its members. The massive stakes might help explain the unabashed lobbying coming from some corners of the football world, as the tension grows in advance of Sunday's final rankings, which will set the bracket. Earlier this week, Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark lit into the selection committee, which doesn't have a single team higher than 15 in the rankings. That does two things: It positions the Big 12 as a one-bid league, and also threatens to makes its champion — either Arizona State or Iowa State — the fifth-best among conference titlists that get automatic bids. Only the top four of those get byes, which could cost the Big 12 a spot in the quarterfinals — or $4 million. “The committee continues to show time and time again that they are paying attention to logos versus resumes,” Yormark said this week, while slamming the idea of teams with two losses in his conference being ranked worse than teams with three in the SEC. The ACC is also staring at a one-bid season with only No. 8 SMU inside the cut line of this week's projected bracket. Miami's loss last week all but bumped the Hurricanes out of the playoffs, a snub that ACC commissioner Jim Phillips said left him “incredibly shocked and disappointed." “As we look ahead to the final rankings, we hope the committee will reconsider and put a deserving Miami in the field," Phillips said in a statement. The lobbying and bickering filters down to the campuses that feel the impact. And, of course, to social media. One of the most entertaining episodes came earlier this week when athletic directors at Iowa State and SMU went back and forth about whose team was more deserving. There are a few stray millions that the selection committee cannot really influence, including a $3 million payment to conferences that make the playoff. In a reminder that all these kids are going to school, after all, the conferences get $300,000 per football team that meets academic requirements to participate in the postseason. (That's basically everyone). Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here . AP college football: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-football-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/college-football: Dr T.M. Balakrishnan Nair, director of the city-based Incois, said that the ocean held the key to mitigating disasters and unlocking sustainable economic growth. He highlighted the role of advanced technologies and predictive modelling in reducing the risks posed by natural disasters. As part of the India Meteorological Department’s 150th-anniversary celebrations, Dr Nair spoke about how real-time oceanographic data, wave forecasting, and storm surge predictions empower coastal communities and industries to prepare for environmental challenges. The lecture, ‘Ocean services for disaster risk reduction and blue economy,’ shed light on the initiatives of Incois (Indian National Centre for Ocean Information Services) in transforming research into actionable insights for disaster mitigation and economic resilience. The event also tied into the five-day international workshop ‘Empowering the Next Wave of Indian Ocean Prediction’, which began on December 9, featuring experts from South Africa, Brazil, Malaysia, and India.
Cowboys star G Zack Martin doubtful to play vs. Commanders
SFA partnership advances carbon capture tech, provides scholarships
Preview: NEC vs. FC Utrecht - prediction, team news, lineupsWeek 12 TNF: Steelers-Browns Preview, Props & PredictionKatie Miller successfully opposed sending condolences to Trayvon Martin’s parents while at university, and in 2020 defended Trump’s ‘zero-tolerance policy’, which infamously led to family separation Stephen Miller and his wife Katie are recognised as one of the most prominent couples within the Maga movement. Elle magazine in March 2020 called Katie “a poster child for Trump’s America”, while in August of the same year, Vanity Fair described the Millers as “Trump’s favourite young power couple” – beyond those involving his own children ( Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump , Donald Trump Jr and Kimberly Guilfoyle). {"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"ImageObject","caption":"Stephen Miller with Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump on election night in 2016. Photo: @StephenM/X","url":"https://img.i-scmp.com/cdn-cgi/image/fit=contain,width=1024,format=auto/sites/default/files/d8/images/canvas/2024/12/05/fd76350b-8413-46bf-9d7c-0cdca3616a00_5392e2c6.jpg"} Stephen Miller with Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump on election night in 2016. Photo: @StephenM/X Now, with president-elect Donald Trump securing key positions in his new administration as he returns to power, Stephen Miller is back in the spotlight, having been named homeland security adviser and deputy chief of staff for policy. Miller was behind some of Trump’s most controversial immigration policies, including the family separation programme during his first term in office. Advertisement Time magazine predicts that Miller will take centre stage in the new administration, with much of Trump’s 2024 election campaign built on promises of mass deportations. As for his wife – a seasoned press secretary who has also been outspoken about migrants – Katie Miller has been all over social media advocating for team Maga. But what do we know about her? Katie Miller’s rise to power {"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"ImageObject","caption":"Katie Miller with then-vice-president Mike Pence. Photo: @katierosemiller/X","url":"https://img.i-scmp.com/cdn-cgi/image/fit=contain,width=1024,format=auto/sites/default/files/d8/images/canvas/2024/12/05/c9aae53d-57b1-40aa-b1b8-b18989d0b39e_d4ad561b.jpg"} Katie Miller with then-vice-president Mike Pence. Photo: @katierosemiller/X Katie Miller née Waldman’s rise to the upper echelons of the White House has been speedy. Per Vanity Fair, after graduating from the University of Florida in 2014, she became a press assistant for the National Republican Senatorial Committee. She later served variously as deputy press secretary, press secretary and communications director, per Newsweek, ultimately becoming press secretary to former vice-president Mike Pence in 2019. She’s politically ambitious {"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"ImageObject","caption":"“Forever thankful for the Trump-Pence administration – because of the last four years, we became a family of three,” Katie Miller wrote on X (formerly Twitter) in January 2021. Photo: @katierosemiller/X","url":"https://img.i-scmp.com/cdn-cgi/image/fit=contain,width=1024,format=auto/sites/default/files/d8/images/canvas/2024/12/05/a80f63e0-a9d9-4bb7-88d6-587e5a127f7f_e9162a66.jpg"} “Forever thankful for the Trump-Pence administration – because of the last four years, we became a family of three,” Katie Miller wrote on X (formerly Twitter) in January 2021. Photo: @katierosemiller/X Katie Miller graduated from the University of Florida and went on to receive a master’s degree in public administration from George Washington University. Some of her former college classmates told Vanity Fair that Miller has always been driven by political ambition. “The only thing she loves or values in this world is power. Anyone she attaches to in her life is simply a pawn to feed her addiction to it,” commented one person.Origin co-founder, John Bissell at the Origin Materials 1 biomaterials pilot plant in Sarnia, ... [+] Ontario, Canada. Plastics are essential to modern life, but their convenience comes at a steep environmental cost. They are made by distilling mined hydrocarbons in a refinery—a process that releases carbon dioxide and other pollutants. Many plastics are used only once, after which they accumulate in landfills, make their way into rivers and oceans, and disturb marine food chains . Recent studies have found that microplastics also make their way into breast milk , suggesting they are an unfortunate component of human food chains as well. The negative environmental impacts of conventionally manufactured plastics are what makes biomaterials such a hot topic. Origin Materials’ (ORGN) has developed a truly revolutionary insight into this hot topic: its scientists have found a way to produce common plastics and other materials using a feedstock of biomaterials like wood chips, cardboard, and sawdust. In the process of bringing this revolutionary innovation to life, Origin’s scientists stumbled onto a second good idea, one which is less revolutionary but has the advantage of being immediately cash flow generative: a novel manufacturing process that increases the recyclability of single-use plastic containers. The potential climate impact of Origin’s biomaterials technology is astounding. Rearranging hydrogen and carbon atoms to produce common plastics like PET (a type of plastic used to produce everything from drink bottles to synthetic fabric) means that not as much oil must be extracted from underground. Origin’s manufacturing advance enhances plastic recycling, reducing the amount of oil refined into plastic. Other biomaterials companies try to process organic waste to mimic the capabilities of the materials we use in everyday life, an approach that typically results in inferior materials that fall apart too easily, cannot withstand extreme temperatures, etc. In contrast, Origin can create the very same plastics and materials we use every day without further unbalancing the planet’s carbon cycle. FBI Warns iPhone And Android Users—Stop Sending Texts Microsoft’s New Update—Bad News Confirmed For 400 Million Windows Users Smartphone Security Warning—Make These Changes Now Or Become A Victim Operationalizing such a revolutionary innovation isn’t easy, and Origin shareholders have had a rough ride. The company announced several years of delays in constructing its first large-scale commercial plant, leading to a gut-wrenching fall in share price over just a few harrowing trading sessions. Origin's stock price took a greater than 60% hit after management announced significant delays to ... [+] the construction of its large-scale commercial biomaterials plant, OM2, in the third quarter of 2023. Origin’s management, to its credit, scrambled to pivot to a partnership model that would allow it to fund a large-scale commercial plant with less of its own capital and harnessed its plastics chemistry expertise to launch a cash-generative recycling-related business to preserve cash on its balance sheet and avoid the threat of delisting. Origin’s biomaterials technology transforms wood scraps into real plastic Founded in 2008 by John Bissell and Ryan Smith, Origin Materials has pioneered a technology based on CMF (chloromethyl furfural), a new chemical platform created from a feedstock of lignocellulosic biomass (anything made from crushed, cut, or chipped wood). Origin’s new chemical platform enables the production of plastics like PET and other industrial chemicals identical to those derived from hydrocarbons without the environmental impacts of oil extraction and refining. The company believes that, depending on the energy mix of the grid from which a large-scale commercial Origin facility draws power, the company can produce plastics that have very low or even negative carbon footprints without resorting to CCS (please see my series on CCS to learn more about this controversial technology). The market size for the suite of products Origin can produce is astounding—trillions of dollars per year. Origin Materials' biomaterials platform uses CMF as its "trunk", from which various products, ... [+] including PET plastics, nylons, epoxies, and many other basic chemicals can be manufactured. While the company scrambled to find capital partners to help fund the construction of a commercial-scale biomaterials plant, Origin’s management realized that its research into the chemistry of PET enabled it to do something no other firm had been able to do at commercial scale: produce bottle caps made out of PET. Thus, Origin’s secondary product line was born: the “caps and closures” business, which sells caps to large drink companies and licenses its unique technology to other caps and closures manufacturers. The ability to produce PET caps confers a big advantage in plastics recycling, and this niche market is worth $65 billion annually. While the caps and closures business has neither the impact nor the market size of its biomaterials platform, the promise of decent near-term cash flow from this niche did provide the impetus for Origin’s stock price to rise above $1 per share, saving management from having to use a “reverse split” to prevent the stock from being delisted. Origin’s caps and closures technology, though not as sexy as its biomaterials tech, makes plastic recycling easier and is cash generative When different types of plastics are melted together in the recycling process, impurities in the resultant compound plastic reduce its usability. Recycling plastics of a uniform type is much more effective and has less impact on the climate. Plastic bottles are made primarily from PET, while caps are made from other plastics—polypropylene and HDPE—which can be recycled on their own but can’t be recycled together with PET. Consumer product goods companies like PepsiCo faced a quandary earlier this year when the EU mandated that caps must be tethered to bottles. They had to follow this regulatory mandate while demonstrating they are doing all they can to increase recyclability, even as HDPE/PP caps cannot be recycled with PET bottles. Origin’s PET manufacturing technology helps CPG companies by enabling caps and bottles to be made from the same material, improving both recycling efficiency and recycled product quality. As more plastic can be recycled, less oil must be dug up and refined into plastic. Origin has made substantial strides in the caps and closures business this year, completing manufacturing trials, forming partnerships with equipment manufacturers, and announcing their ability to produce tethered caps a month before the EU deadline. In August, the company signed a memorandum of understanding with an unnamed client for PET caps estimated by Origin’s management to be worth $100 million over the next two years. Revenue from this contract will begin in 2025, the company announced, with higher projected sales in 2026. At its 3Q24 earnings announcement, the company provided a bit more color to the $100 million contract and reaffirmed its full-2024 guidance to generate revenues between $25 million and $35 million and hold full-year net cash burn between $55 million and $65 million. I will be posting a separate report on Origin’s third-quarter earnings in the Climate Tech Venture Review, so I won’t rehash the announcement here. While I am most excited about the future of Origin’s biomaterials platform, I am impressed at its nimble and creative strategic adaptation in the face of a major setback. By pivoting to a cash-generative model with caps and closures and establishing strategic partnerships to reduce capital expenditures in its biomaterials business, Origin has taken the necessary steps to realize its vision of plastics made from wood waste. Despite its investment uncertainties, Origin’s biomaterials technology is so compelling and its leadership has displayed such grit that it cannot be ignored. Intelligent investors take note.
Bureau Veritas Marine & Offshore (BV), a world leader in testing, inspection, and certification, is partnering with Samsung Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. (SHI), a leading global shipbuilding and offshore engineering company, to develop Floating CO2 Storage Units (FCSU) and Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) projects in the Republic of Korea, with the aim to significantly reduce green house gas emissions. The collaboration will center on validating and certifying cutting-edge CCS technologies that are cost-effective and sustainable. By blending BV’s renowned certification expertise with SHI’s innovative, market-leading technology, this partnership aims to set new industry standards and accelerate the deployment of CCS solutions that can drive a greener, more efficient future. BV and SHI will also collaborate on pilot projects to test the commercial potential of CCS technologies. BV will use its certification expertise to handle technical reviews and independent risk assessments. Additionally, they will conduct environmental studies and develop risk management plans to ensure the safety and sustainability of CCS projects. Representatives from Bureau Veritas Marine & Offshore and Samsung Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. Alex Gregg-Smith, Senior Vice President, Asia Pacific (APA) at Bureau Veritas Marine & Offshore said: “Our partnership with SHI is an important step in our efforts to support the deployment of innovative carbon capture and storage technologies. By combining our expertise, we aim to advance the commercialization of FCSU and CCS solutions, which are critical for achieving global climate goals.” Mr. Haeki Jang, Chief Technology Officer, Samsung Heavy Industries Co., Ltd., said: “This collaboration marks a significant step towards realizing our vision of a sustainable future. By leveraging the strengths of both SHI and BV, we are committed to accelerating the deployment of carbon capture and storage solutions that meet the evolving demands of the global maritime and offshore industries. Together, we aim to contribute to a cleaner, more sustainable world through the development of advanced CCS technologies.” Source: Bureau Veritas
- Previous:
- Next: pRvk#Y c0hb^uyc(B@ w6Z0)0 كra wa3pbl8O¬*v؛Y'">̂w`K~==a,-0C.6
