Patti LuPone & Christine Ebersole in ‘War Paint'(Photo: Joan Marcus) War Paint Related Shows View Comments The 2017 Tony Awards race is really heating up! As expected, War Paint, starring two-time Tony winners Patti LuPone and Christine Ebersole, is heading to Broadway this season. Directed by Michael Greif, the new musical about beauty titans Helena Rubinstein and Elizabeth Arden will begin previews at the Nederlander Theatre on March 7, 2017. Opening night is scheduled for April 6.War Paint will additionally feature Tony nominees John Dossett and Douglas Sills, who are also reprising their roles from the production’s world premiere at Chicago’s Goodman Theatre this summer. Dossett is set to portray Tommy Lewis, Arden’s husband and chief marketing officer, and Sills will once again take on the character of the ambitious Harry Fleming, Rubinstein’s clubby confidante and faithful ally.LuPone was most recently seen on the New York stage in Shows for Days off-Broadway. Her numerous Great White Way credits include Tony-winning turns in Evita and Gypsy, as well as Sweeney Todd, Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown, Master Class and Anything Goes.Ebersole won Tonys for her performance as Edith Beale and Little Edie in Grey Gardens and for her role in the 2001 revival of 42nd Street. Her additional Broadway credits include Blithe Spirit, Steel Magnolias, Dinner at Eight and The Best Man.Dossett received a Tony nod for Gypsy; his other Main Stem credits include Chicago, Pippin, Newsies, Mamma Mia!, The Constant Wife, Democracy, Dinner at Eight, The Adventures of Tom Sawyer and Ragtime. Sills garnered a Tony nod for The Scarlet Pimpernel; other Great White Way credits include Living on Love and Little Shop of Horrors.Featuring a score by Scott Frankel and Michael Korie and a book by Doug Wright, War Paint follows cosmetics trailblazers Helena Rubinstein (LuPone) and Elizabeth Arden (Ebersole), who defined beauty standards for the first half of the 20th Century. Brilliant innovators with humble roots, both women were masters of self-invention who sacrificed everything to become the country’s first major female entrepreneurs. They were also fierce competitors, whose 50-year tug-of-war would give birth to an industry that would forever change the face of America. From Fifth Avenue society to the halls of Congress, their intense rivalry was ruthless, relentless and legendary—pushing both women to build international empires in a world dominated by men.The musical is inspired by Lindy Woodhead’s book, War Paint, and Ann Carol Grossman and Arnie Reisman’s documentary film, The Powder & the Glory. Greif, Frankel, Korie and Wright all previously collaborated on Grey Gardens with Ebersole.No word yet on further casting, but the Chicago production’s company also included Mary Ernster, Leslie Donna Flesner, David Girolmo, Joanna Glushak, Chris Hoch, Mary Claire King, Steffanie Leigh, Erik Liberman, Barbara Marineau, Stephanie Jae Park and Angel Reda.Choreography will be by Christopher Gattelli, with scenic design by David Korins, costume design by Catherine Zuber, lighting design by Kenneth Posner, sound design by Brian Ronan, orchestrations by Bruce Coughlin and music direction by Lawrence Yurman. Show Closed This production ended its run on Nov. 5, 2017
Advances in Electricity-Storage Technology FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailPrint分享Utility Dive:2017 could go down as the year regulated utilities took the lead in energy storage.Several of the most notable energy storage projects this year were done by or for regulated utilities. And that momentum will likely carry into 2018 as well, Tim Gretjak, an analyst at Lux Research, told Utility Dive.In some cases, it is easier for a regulated utility to make the economic case for energy storage, Gretjak said. It is hard for developers of energy storage projects to compete in energy markets where the rules do not value the flexibility that storage can provide, he added. The trend could be bolstered by the fact that utilities across the country are beginning to include energy storage in their resource planning processes. In Oregon, for instance, Portland General Electric’s integrated resource plan proposes five storage projects. In New Mexico, the Public Regulation Commission amended the state’s 2017 IRP rules to include energy storage. High on the list of notable projects of the year is Tucson Electric Power’s (TEP) solar plus storage facility. The project is being built by NextEra Energy and features a 100 MW solar array and a 30 MW, 120 MWh energy storage system. It’s most notable feature, however, is its power purchase agreement.TEP reported that the all-in cost for the solar-plus-storage project was “significantly less than $0.045/kWh over 20 years.” TEP said the solar portion of the project, at under 3¢/kWh, was “the lowest price recorded in the U.S.” That puts the remaining storage portion of the project at about 1.5¢/kWh.The project marked the lowest price announced for a solar-plus-storage project to date, far outstripping the nearest contender, a 11¢/kWh PPA between Kauai Island Electric Cooperative and AES Corp. for a 28 MW solar array with a 20 MW, 100 MWh battery system on Kauai, Hawaii.Another of the year’s most notable projects also is in Arizona, but is being developed by Arizona Public Service. It is a much smaller project, 2 MW, 8 MWh, but is notable because it is being undertaken without a statutory or regulatory mandate.APS is building the project as an alternative to building about 20 miles of new transmission lines to serve the small community of Punkin Center about 90 miles northeast of Phoenix.APS has not disclosed the cost of either the storage project or the transmission lines, but estimates the batteries will enable it to defer investment in a new transmission line for up to six years. And during that time, the batteries will also deliver additional value by providing frequency regulation and bolstering grid reliability.T&D (transmission and distribution) deferral is a growing trend, especially among regulated utilities, Manghani told Utility Dive, but such efforts are also very specific, particularly when any individual project can require regulatory approval.Another T&D deferral project recently surfaced in Massachusetts where National Grid has plans to install a 48 MWh energy storage system on the island of Nantucket. The storage project will help back up a new diesel generator on Nantucket and defer investment in a new subsea cable to the island.In North Carolina, Duke Energy in April won regulatory approval to build a 10 kW solar installation with a Fluidic 95 kWh zinc-air battery in the Great Smoky Mountains of Haywood County. The energy storage system will power a remote communications tower in the national park that is currently served by an overhead transmission line.Duke says the microgrid project, which would cost less than $1 million, is less expensive than upgrading and maintaining the existing four-mile 12.47-kV distribution feeder that travels over rugged mountain terrain and is due for upgrades this year.The project demonstrates the “practicality” of energy storage, Gretjak said.Duke also plans to invest $30 million in two battery storage systems in North Carolina, which the company says will be the first large storage projects built by its regulated utility. “Battery technology has matured, and we are ready to take the next step. We can go to regulators and say this makes economic sense, Duke spokesman Randy Wheeless told Utility Dive at the time.Energy storage once again made market inroads this year, as it did last year, by responding to emergencies. Last year, energy storage’s value was on display when it was called on to respond to the Aliso Canyon gas leaks that threatened gas supplies to power plants critical to reliability in Southern California. Following a call by state regulators, developers stepped up to quickly build several large storage projects to support grid reliability in the region. One of those project, Powin Energy’s 2 MW, 8 MWh battery system in Irvine, came online in January.In March, Tesla CEO Elon Musk tweeted that he could solve blackouts that have been plaguing South Australia by installing a battery storage system in 100 days or it would be free. Tesla made good on Musk’s promise this week, nearing completion of a $50 million, 100 MW, 129 MWh storage system at Neoen’s 315 MW Hornsdale wind farm. The storage system, which would be the largest in the world, is expected to come online Dec. 1.The Tesla project could soon be overshadowed by a massive 100 MW, 500 MWh storage system that is expected to “be the cornerstone of a new smart energy grid” in Hubei Province, China. The vanadium flow battery project is being built by Hubei Pingfan Vanadium Energy Storage Technology Co., a subsidiary of Hubei Pingfan, a mining and industrial metals and minerals company that has about 1 million tonnes of vanadium in its reserves.The China project may not have much overlap with U.S. projects because the energy markets in the two countries are so different, but China’s push could demonstrate the value of flow batteries and might aid the economies of scale for the technology. More: Top energy storage projects driving the sector in 2017
Rules panel asks for DNA testing extension October 1, 2003 Gary Blankenship Senior Editor Regular News Rules panel asks for DNA testing extension Senior EditorAfter hearing an impassioned plea from two law professors, a Bar rules committee has voted to seek an emergency extension giving inmates more time to seek DNA testing that could exonerate them.The Criminal Procedure Rules Committee voted 23-10 on September 5 to seek the rule change. It filed an emergency petition with the Supreme Court on September 17 to extend the filing deadline for testing DNA evidence from October 1, 2003, to October 1, 2004. The committee met in Tampa during the Bar’s General Meeting.Acting days after the committee vote, the Bar’s Executive Committee endorsed the change, with Bar President Miles McGrane thanking rules committee Chair Judge Olin Shinholser “for the courage of what your committee did.”And state Sen. Alex Villalobos, R-Miami, filed SB 44, a shell bill, stating that, “The legislature intends to revise laws relating to DNA evidence following conviction.” Villalobos, who chairs both the Senate Judiciary and Criminal Justice committees, said he intends to have a joint meeting of the two panels later this month to address the issue.Two and a half years ago, the rules panel voted to seek an amendment allowing convicted inmates to seek DNA testing of evidence that could exonerate them. The committee recommended the two-year deadline.Shortly afterward, the legislature passed its own law, setting a two-year limit expiring October 1, 2003, for seeking the DNA testing. Noting the law and the committee’s majority vote, the court set the two-year limit.The problem, according to Nova Southeastern University law Professor Catherine Arcabascio and Florida State University law Professor Sandy D’Alemberte, is two years wasn’t enough time to review all of the cases. The two professors head the Innocence Project at their respective schools, which seeks DNA testing in criminal cases when it could lead to exoneration.D’Alemberte said the debate over the extension usually gets tied up in emotions involved in delaying death penalties, but the two schools work only with noncapital cases. There are hundreds which have not been reviewed, he added.“The sentence of everyone in the Florida Innocence Project is being carried out. The sentence is not being delayed,” D’Alemberte said. He added there’s no reason for attorneys representing the inmates to delay seeking the DNA test, either.The problem has come from inadequate resources to screen cases. Both law schools use volunteer law students to examine cases, but they have hundreds to tackle, and it can be an involved process.D’Alemberte said the volunteers have to track down files, determine whether DNA testing would make a difference, and see if the evidence still exists. Then they have to find a pro bono attorney to take the case.He also argued that the extension would improve the administration of justice. Without the longer date, inmates will flood the courts with last-minute petitions for testing, including mostly cases where testing won’t help — and the courts will have to sort through the cases, he said.So far, D’Alemberte estimated that screening has shown DNA testing won’t help or the evidence isn’t available in the overwhelming majority of the cases, which saves valuable court time. Nationally, of the cases that have been screened and gone through court, about 40 percent have resulted in exonerations, he said.Committee member Abe Laesser, who chaired a subcommittee which studies the exemption, questioned whether it would do any good because one year wasn’t enough time to deal with the backlog.D’Alemberte didn’t disagree.“I don’t want to represent to you it can be done in a year,” he said. “But not one of these cases and lawyers has any interest in delay.”He estimated it would take $5 million and three years to work through the backlog.Arcabascio said her Nova project has screened 800 cases, which has led to the filing of seven cases, and she expected another 15 would be filed by the October 1 deadline. There are still 300 cases that need to be screened there, she said. FSU has 297 cases awaiting screening.Committee member George Tragos said he had just accepted a screened case, and knowing someone had already reviewed the records will help meet the filing deadline.“The time limit was artificial when we set it,” he said. “It was set because we didn’t have any time records or statistics to show us whether that time was reasonable. They now have the history to show that time wasn’t reasonable.”A one-year extension is like a sunset, he said, noting the Innocence Project will have to justify any further continuance.Laesser said his subcommittee originally voted 3-2 in favor of a one-year extension, but then one member, who thought he could not vote, discovered he could, and that made it a 3-3 tie. Laesser said as chair he would vote to break the tie by opposing the extension.He said he was concerned about delays and the lack of guarantees the backlogs could be addressed in a timely fashion.“I don’t have a strong way of knowing how many of those hundreds of cases that are in the pipeline are going to be closed if we agree to an extension,” Laesser said. He added if the extension failed, his subcommittee would look at lowering the standards in existing rules that would allow waiving the time standards.Committee members also had questions whether the Supreme Court had the authority to change the time limit when it had been established in law by the legislature. D’Alemberte argued that under Allen v. Butterworth, (case no. SC00-113), decided by the court in 2000, that the justices could amend the rule.Following Chair Shinholser’s ruling that the subcommittee had voted 3-3 to not recommend the rule change, the panel voted 20-10 to reject that recommendation. It then voted 23-10 — three votes more than the two-thirds required — to seek the one-year extension. By a majority vote, the committee decided to seek an emergency amendment since waiting for the normal two-year cycle rule review would render the one-year extension moot.Bar Executive Committee members, when they met September 16, also expressed concern about whether the court could amend the rule without further legislative action. Bar General Counsel Paul Hill told the members that’s a borderline question depending on whether the change is seen as procedural — which is under the court’s purview — or substantive, which is under legislative oversight.The committee, which acts for the Board of Governors between its meetings, voted 11-0 to endorse the change and to support seeking an emergency rule amendment from the Supreme Court.McGrane reported that as a courtesy he had informed the Governor’s Office and the Attorney General’s Office about the proposed amendment. He said the Attorney General’s Office indicated they would not take a position on the extension.Villalobos said he was approached by attorney Barry Scheck during the last week of the session. Scheck, who runs the national Innocence Project, asked Villalobos to introduce a bill to extend the deadline — the first time the senator knew there was a problem.He said he told Scheck it was too late in the session to introduce legislation.Then a few weeks later, D’Alemberte and Arcabascio visited to further explain, and Villalobos said that was the first time he realized virtually everyone affected by the deadline was not on Death Row.The original two-year deadline was a time frame agreed to by prosecutors, the three Capital Collateral Regional Counsel offices. “When we were doing the hearings [on the bill], no one complained about the time limits,” Villalobos said.He agreed with Arcabascio and D’Alemberte that there is a legitimate concern, and consequently scheduled the rare joint meeting of the two Senate committee’s concerned with legal matters.“We will invite them, and state attorneys, and the attorney general and all interested parties and see if we can come up with language to solve this,” Villalobos said.He added the bill now contains no details because “I really want to wait and see what the testimony airs out. For all I know, there might be some other unforeseen circumtances. That’s why it’s important to get everyone together at one place.”The committees’ meeting is set for October 21.
Recalling the horror of that night, Joni, who has chosen to use a pseudonym to protect his identity, explained how he confronted Lukas Lucky Ngalngola, the director of Joni’s orphanage, whom the boys referred to as the “night bat”. He said Lukas begged for forgiveness for “making a mistake” and got to his knees and kissed Joni’s feet.Joni, who was 19 years old at the time, did not know what to do next with Lukas, or Brother Angelo as he styled himself. Joni wanted to hit Angelo, his sole guardian and the head of the Kencana Bejana Rohani orphanage in Depok, West Java, where Joni and dozens of other children lived under Angelo’s care.But Joni could not think straight.“I rushed to the chapel. I asked God to forgive my sin and his.” It was an hour past midnight on Sept. 9, 2019, when Joni, a teenage boy living in an orphanage, was awakened by what he described as a “painful feeling” on his genitals. When he opened his eyes, he beheld a nightmare.“He was there. He was shocked,” Joni said. “I put on my pants and chased him down the stairs.”“’What did you do to me, Brother? Why did you pull [my pants] down?’” Joni later went upstairs to wake up the cook, Yosina, also known as Mama Ejon, and poured his heart out in tears. “I couldn’t bear it any longer. I told her everything and asked her what to do. Mama told me to report him to the police.”Read also: Abused and frightened, orphanage boys cry for help but the state, church fail themYosina confirmed Joni’s story, adding that she encouraged him to talk about the matter first with a caretaker named Aloysius Tolok, also known as Alo.Joni’s courage to speak up eventually inspired other boys living under Angelo to open up to the adults they knew. Angelo, a member of the Blessed Sacrament Missionaries of Charity (BSMC) congregation, based in the Philippines, was arrested by the Depok Police on Sept. 14, 2019.However, he was released after three months in detention because the police failed to complete the dossiers required for the prosecution to bring the case to court.Joni was one of eight boys who shared their stories with Tirto.id in two separate interviews on Aug. 12 and 22, as part of a collaboration with The Jakarta Post.Some of the boys said they were molested, others that they had endured physical abuse. All of them called their alleged abuser, Angelo, the kelelawar malam (night bat) as they said he would carry out his terror in the middle of the night, usually at around 1 a.m., dressed in black.Unlike Joni, who confronted his molester, the other boys were too confused or disoriented to take immediate action. Some thought they had been drugged, noting that they had discovered their pants either unzipped or taken off.Lorenzo, who has also chosen a pseudonym for this article, recalled finding his pants unzipped one day when he woke up. “I did not know what he [Angelo] did to me. I was unconscious.”Lorenzo said he was convinced that Angelo had molested him. He recalled the nights when he and some other boys caught Angelo in the act but were unable to accuse their sole provider.“We could not say anything because our lives were in Angelo’s hands. We could not fight back, even though we were hurt, because we were certain that no one would support us,” Lorenzo said.“We have nobody here. We live far away from our parents. We did not know where to go to report [our experience]. Also, we did not know what would happen to us if we reported [Angelo],” he said. “Who would pay for our school fees? Our parents are poor. We also couldn’t go home because we didn’t have money for transportation.”Read also: Justice delayed, denied for victims of sexual abuse in Catholic ChurchIn an attempt to prevent Angelo from preying on other boys, Lorenzo and other older boys would take turns on night watch, blocking the doors to their rooms with beds to prevent Angelo from sneaking in. But additional boys believed they were molested during this period.Paul, for example, said he witnessed Angelo engage in oral sex with orphanage residents at least three times. Paul believed he was probably molested as well but could not remember because he believed he had been drugged.Like his friends, Paul, who was 16 at the time and has chosen a pseudonym for this article, could not bring himself to publicly accuse his alleged molester.“Our anger would instantly fade away when we looked him in the eyes, as if he was magic.”Paul, who is related to Angelo by blood, said Angelo would take the boys to the cinema “as a treat” so they would forget the predation. “And he would promise not to repeat it, which he never kept.”As the night bat continued his abuse, the boys brought the matter to Alo, who suggested they make peace with the situation, an idea the boys helplessly submitted to until Joni spoke up.But everything changed after Joni reached out to other adults. Other boys from Kencana Bejana Rohani followed suit and discussed their stories with caregivers and some Catholic brothers at their local church. Some of the children told the principal of a school they attended. The principal later contacted the National Child Protection Agency (KPAI).Eventually, three of the boys – Lorenzo, Joni and Simone – worked up the courage to give their testimonies to the Depok Police in a case filed by activist Farid Ari Fandi against Angelo – who had been detained.Two of the boys were about to undergo a physical examination at the police office when all three were picked up by someone who the police failed to identify. Investigators only managed to examine one boy.The police said they could not continue the legal process because they had not completed the dossiers required for the prosecution to bring the case to court. The claimed this was because they could not find the boys.Angelo walked free on Dec. 8, 2019.Poverty lured children into Angelo’s netAccording to a document the Post obtained from the Law and Human Rights Ministry, which certifies nonprofit foundations operating in the country, Angelo registered Kencana Bejana Rohani as a charity foundation on Dec. 14, 2015. The document lists him as founder and chairman. But, according to Darius Rebong, Angelo’s acquaintance, Angelo had been operating the orphanage under the same name since 2007.Read also: Time for Catholic Church to decide which side of history it is onIn addition to Kencana Bejana Rohani, Angelo had also established another charity foundation, Fajar Cahaya Harapan. A document from the ministry shows that it was registered on April 14 of this year.The children who lived at Angelo’s orphanage came from different parts of the country. Some, like Lorenzo and Joni, were from villages in North Sumatra, while others were from Maluku and East Nusa Tenggara.Yet all of them shared similar backgrounds, ones of poverty and limited access to education.Many of the children who lived under Angelo’s care still had parents. The parents entrusted Angelo with their children because of promises of a brighter future, according to the boys.Angelo was able to reach out to more boys with the help of those who had first joined his institution. Some of the boys who came from North Sumatra said they learned of Angelo and his education charity program from a person named Pilipus, one of the first boys that Angelo took in and a person they considered a friend.Simone, not his real name, from North Sumatra, for example, said he did not know Angelo until he joined the orphanage.“I knew him from Pilipus. At first my parents did not allow me to go because they were afraid that I might fall into human trafficking. They changed their mind after Pilipus convinced them. Pilipus had joined [the orphanage],” said Simone.Like Simone, Lorenzo decided to leave his parents in a North Sumatra village for Depok after being convinced by Pilipus. Lorenzo described Pilipus as Angelo’s “right hand” man whose job was to “win the hearts of parents”.The children from Maluku and East Nusa Tenggara said they learned of Angelo either from family members or acquaintances of family members.Only a few parents found out about Angelo’s alleged abuse, according to the boys. Some of those who knew confronted Angelo but decided to keep the matter to themselves after Angelo agreed to continue to pay for their children’s education until graduation.“So all that suffering, all that wrongdoing – the children put it out of their minds, so to speak. They were aware, but they were putting it out of their minds for the sake of their future,” Farid told the Post.Darius took over Angelo’s role as the guardian of the orphanage after his arrest because of what Darius referred to as “an agreement” between the two. He has been taking care of the children since and has been reaching out to donors to help support the children under his care.Topics :
Governments should consider action to foster more private-sector investment in support of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), according to Europe’s largest investor.Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM), which runs the NOK8.6tn (€879bn) Government Pension Fund Global (GPFG) in Oslo, wrote in a paper: “Achieving the SDGs, in both developed and developing countries, could contribute to the long-term return of the fund through increased economic resilience.”In an Asset Manager Perspectives discussion paper, NBIM said people often assumed that, in order to meet the financing needs of the SDGs, the huge level of savings around the world could be matched with sustainable investment opportunities.However, it argued that if such projects offered an attractive risk-related return, then capital would naturally flow to them already. NBIM went on to paint a more complex picture. “An important hurdle to investing in SDG-supportive projects is that the costs of unsustainable business practices are frequently not borne by the producers, but by society, or other businesses at large,” the manager said.“Sustainable investments may also create additional costs in the short run, while the benefits may only accrue in the long run.”It argued that governments could introduce market-based mechanisms to incentivise companies and individuals to internalise the costs of the pollution and environmental damage they caused.NBIM also said that a longer investment horizon could also help match initial costs with revenues further into the future. “Recent research indicates that some of the currently employed long-run discount rates for climate change abatement investments may be too high, depressing the attractiveness of such investments,” it said.Governments could also make co-investments and cooperate more closely with the private sector, it suggested, and consider aligning financial incentives with the SDGs through public policies and regulatory frameworks.NBIM said that, apart from providing long-term capital and promoting value creation at companies, it invested in 38 developing markets, and in firms selling or developing products or services for a more environmentally-friendly economy. It also actively excludes companies with “unsustainable business practices that may impede progress towards the SDGs”.
Increased market awareness of climate change impacts could add as much as 3% to investor returns in “less than a year”, according to a report from Mercer.In a follow-up to its acclaimed 2015 climate change report, the consultancy said new short-term stress-test analyses – requested by its investor clients – had demonstrated how “longer-term return impacts could manifest as shorter-term climate-related market repricing events”.If markets priced in global temperatures rising by 2⁰C above pre-industrial levels – the scenario central to the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change – this could result in a positive repricing of as much as 3% in less than 12 months, Mercer’s analysis found.However, if markets priced in a temperature rise of 4°C, the consultancy said the repricing could be negative by as much as 3%. “Testing an increased probability of a 2°C scenario or a 4°C scenario with greater market awareness, even for the modelled diversified portfolios, results in +3% to -3% return impacts in less than a year,” said Mercer.According to the consultancy, it was important to overlay such analysis with an opinion on the likelihood of such developments.The consultancy said that, for a variety of reasons, it did not believe markets were fully pricing in climate change, but that it viewed increasing climate awareness in market pricing to be more likely than decreasing awareness.This, it added, supported the idea of a premium that could be harnessed from a transition to a low-carbon economy.“Although a 2⁰C scenario definitely still presents transition risk – especially for portfolios aligned to a 3⁰C or 4⁰C [scenario] – opportunistic investors can target investment in the many mitigation and adaptation solutions required for a transformative transition,” said Mercer.In two sample portfolios used by Mercer, the sustainability-themed version was almost 0.2% a year better off between now and 2030.2⁰C scenario ‘most beneficial’ for investorsMercer said its updated climate scenario investment modelling strengthened the case for investors working to keep average warming to below 2°C.In the report – dubbed ’Investing in a Time of Climate Change – the Sequel’ – the consultancy modelled three climate change scenarios: 2°C, 3°C and 4°C average global temperature increases over pre-industrial levels. These were each modelled over three timeframes: to 2030, 2050, and 2100.Mercer said the results of its analysis emphasised why a scenario in which average warming was kept to below 2°C was “most beneficial” for long-term investors.The current trajectory, according to Climate Action Tracker, is for warming of 3.3°C above pre-industrial levels. A separate climate change monitoring tool operated by asset manager Schroders reported that the predicted temperature rise was 3.9°C as of the end of 2018.Mercer said its findings “strengthen the argument for investor action on climate change and suggest greater attention is required on how investors will actively support the transition to a 2°C scenario”.Investing for a 2°C world was “both an imperative and an opportunity,” the consultancy said. For nearly all asset classes, regions and timeframes, a 2°C scenario lead to enhanced projected returns compared with higher forecast temperatures.Mercer added that there were “many notable investment opportunities enabled in a low-carbon transition”.Testing the scenariosThe consultancy applied its modelling to two sample asset allocations: a diversified growth allocation, and a similar portfolio with explicit allocations to sustainability-themed investments in multiple asset classes.“In the two sample portfolios, there is a return opportunity to 2030 of between 0.1% and 0.3% [per year] in a 2°C scenario, compared to -0.07% [a year] in a 4⁰C scenario,” said Mercer. “To 2100, a 4⁰C scenario leaves each portfolio down more than 0.1% [a year] compared to a 2⁰C scenario.”Helga Birgden, global business leader for responsible investment at Mercer, added: “The modelling shows that greater inclusion of sustainable assets into portfolios can enhance returns. The evidence is compelling and reinforces the findings made in Mercer’s 2015 climate change report, supporting greater urgency for action to achieve a well-below 2°C scenario.”The report can be downloaded here.
A joint venture between Hibiscus Petroleum and 3D Oil has been granted renewal of exploration permit VIC/P57 in the Gippsland Basin offshore Australia for a further five year term.3D Oil said on Wednesday that the extension was granted to a joint venture of Carnarvon Hibiscus Pty Ltd (CHPL) and Gippsland Hibiscus, both subsidiaries of Malaysian company Hibiscus Petroleum, and 3D Oil. Hibiscus is the concession operator.The permit has been optimized for an area dense with high potential leads and prospects including at least one gas prospect.3D Oil added that a thorough prospectivity review was conducted throughout the last 18 months which revealed that VIC/P57 contains significant remaining commercial potential.Six leads and prospects were identified, the highest value of these include the Felix and Pointer prospects.Felix is a classic, low-risk Upper Latrobe Group oil and gas target, located between the Wirrah discovery and Moonfish field. The Pointer prospect is a Type II AVO supported gas prospect with a best estimate prospective resource of 235 BCF. It is at shallow drilling depths (less than 2,000 meters), situated in shallow water and close to existing infrastructure.3D Oil said that the minimum guaranteed work-program, to be fulfilled within the first three years of the renewal term, includes 230 square kilometers of seismic reprocessing accompanied by geological and geophysical studies.This will determine the most likely structural configuration and accurate oil and gas volume of the Felix prospect, provide a clearer understanding of the Pointer AVO anomaly and, assess the Emperor sub-group stratigraphy for additional gas prospects.According to CGG, who is currently undertaking the Gippsland ReGeneration Reprocessing project, there are many areas of improvement that will undoubtedly result in enhanced imaging of the sub-surface.These techniques have recently been applied in the eastern Gippsland Basin, at the previously poorly understood Dory gas discovery.
Japan-based Imabari Shipbuilding held a naming ceremony for the new 14,000 TEU container vessel YM Wellbeing on September 18, 2018. The vessel is the first from the batch of five boxships Taiwan’s shipping firm Yang Ming Marine chartered from Shoei Kisen Kaisha, the shipowning arm of Imabari.The cotainership giant is the 16th 14,000 TEU vessel to join Yang Ming’s global container fleet.The new ship is designed with a nominal capacity 14,220 TEU and equipped with 1,000 reefer plugs. It features a length of 366.44 meters and a beam of 51.2 meters.Yang Ming informed that it plans to deploy the new ship in THE Alliance’s MD2 service as of October 5. The ports of call are in the following order: Pusan–Qingdao–Ningbo–Shanghai–Kaohsiung–Shekou–Singapore–Piraeus–La Spezia–Genoa–Fos Sur Mer–Piraeus–Singapore–Hong Kong–Pusan.The company added that, with the newbuilding, it will gain more strength in the competitive market through this robust network and deliver more efficient and comprehensive services.
Tonight begins the sectional round of the state football playoffs. Unlike many other states, all Indiana schools make the playoffs despite their season record. Two of the area schools with the best chances of advancing seem to be in the EIAC. East Central and Lawrenceburg are both highly ranked in the state. Two other area schools finished their seasons very strongly. They are Milan who finds themselves in a highly competitive sectional, and Batesville who also has ranked teams in their sectional.Since everyone enters the sectional 0-0, who is to say that any team could not go on and win? This is the nice part of the Indiana playoff system. Good luck to all the area teams.