#Portugal 2030

[tuxedosaiyan]

Al-Andaluz hosts of the 2030 World Cup!

[arts-publisher]

[azulpressagadir]

Morocco, Portugal and Spain Officially FIFA 2030 World Cup Hosts

Zurich – Morocco, Portugal and Spain have officially been appointed as host countries for the 2030 FIFA World Cup by the FIFA Congress, gathered Wednesday in an extraordinary session by videoconference. During the same session, chaired by FIFA president Gianni Infantino from Zurich, Congress members also approved awarding the three centenary matches to Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay, while…

[mgouijjane]

(via "Morocco, Spain and Portugal 2030" Classic T-Shirt for Sale by USAPride2)

[l8news]

Vienes o voy: El comité del Mundial de Futbol de 2030 en España, Portugal y Marruecos anunció que el evento tendrá como nombre y logo el lema "Yalla Vamos 2030". Yalla significa "vamos" en árabe. [x]

[biglisbonnews]

Moroccan, Portuguese and Spanish FA bosses meet to progress 2030 World Cup bid By Paul NicholsonSeptember 18 – The Spain, Portugal, and Morocco joint bid for the 2030 World Cup took another step forward over the weekend with the acting president of the Royal Spanish Football Federation, Pedro Rocha, hosting a meeting with his Portuguese and Moroccan counterparts.With the Spanish federation having hit the headlines for all the wrong reasons over the behaviour of former president Luis Rubiales at the presentation ceremony of the Women’s World Cup, Read more …The post Moroccan, Portuguese and Spanish FA bosses meet to progress 2030 World Cup bid appeared first on Inside World Football. https://www.insideworldfootball.com/2023/09/18/moroccan-portuguese-spanish-fa-bosses-meet-progress-2030-world-cup-bid/

[fellshish]

Good news?

Looks like there might be a ceasefire and hostage release coming soon in Israel/Gaza.

That's nice, right? Sort of?

uh, what else..

The first round of NEA (National Endowment of the Arts) grants for 2025 were announced the other day. $36,790,500 for 1,474 arts projects across the 50 states, DC and Puerto Rico.

MacKenzie Scott gave a (rare) third big donation to Undue Medical Debt a few weeks ago. Another $50million. Enough for them to wipe out potentially as much as five BILLION dollars of medical debt.

apparently the UK might actually be on track to meet its 2030 climate targets. last year it became the first G7 country to end coal burning for power. nearly 60% of the UKs energy was generated by renewables (wind and solar) in 2024. also electric vehicle sales increased every month in the UK in 2024 while petrol (gas) powered car sales dropped to record lows.

that old fascist in France (Jean-Marie Le Pen) finally died last week.

Portugal's government announced a new plan to help make the national diet more plant-based. they're becoming world leaders in vegan food and climate action.

a summer camp for HIV positive kids in Minnesota recently shut down.. because there aren't enough kids with HIV anymore (thanks to antiretroviral medications perinatal transmission (in utero transmission from mother to baby) has fallen to below 1%. globally the number of new HIV infections among under 14s has declined 38% in the past ten years.

#goodnews

thank you so much i wish all news bulletins were like this forever

[afadaily]

IT’S OFFICIAL: Argentina 🇦🇷, Paraguay 🇵🇾 & Uruguay 🇺🇾 will host the 2030 World Cup inaugural matches 🏆

Spain 🇪🇸. Portugal 🇵🇹 and Morocco 🇲🇦 will host the closing matches.

[mchiti]

WORLD CUP 2030 IN MOROCCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

- and spain and portugal but step aside you two, you’re not the main character

MOROCCO SECOND AFRICAN COUNTRY TO HOST IT EVER!!!!!

DIMA MGHREB BTCHESSSSSS

MACHALLAH mgharba 3alam tbarkallah 🇲🇦❤️

[vegansforfuture]

Portugal spricht sich in seinem neuen Klimaplan eindeutig für die Umsetzung der Agrar- und Ernährungswende aus! 👍😎🌱

Bericht von Proveg dazu: "Das portugiesische Ministerium für Umwelt und Energie hat mit der Genehmigung des aktualisierten Nationalen Energie- und Klimaplans (NECP 2030) sein Engagement für ökologische Nachhaltigkeit bekräftigt.

Der überarbeitete Plan führt eine bahnbrechende Initiative (siehe Seite 203 des Plans) zur Förderung einer „kohlenstoffarmen Ernährung“ ein, die sich auf die Verringerung des Konsums tierischer Proteine, die Förderung pflanzlicher Proteinalternativen und die Planung einer nationalen Strategie für pflanzliche Proteine ​​konzentriert.

Der neue portugiesische NECP zielt auf die Förderung einer abwechslungsreichen Ernährung ab, wobei der Schwerpunkt auf der Verringerung der Aufnahme tierischer Proteine ​​und der Erhöhung des Konsums pflanzlicher Proteine ​​liegt.

Zu den geplanten Maßnahmen gehören die Entwicklung einer nationalen Strategie für den Konsum von pflanzlichen Proteinen, insbesondere Hülsenfrüchten, und die Ausweitung des Angebots an pflanzlichen Mahlzeiten in öffentlichen Kantinen. Darüber hinaus wird die Notwendigkeit hervorgehoben, Lebensmittelabfälle zu reduzieren und Produktionspraktiken zu ändern.

Laut ProVeg ist ein entscheidender nächster Schritt die geplante Erstellung eines detaillierten Aktionsplans für pflanzliches Eiweiß, der dessen Produktion und Forschung fördert. Die Entwicklung dieses Sektors kann erhebliche ökologische, gesundheitliche und wirtschaftliche Vorteile bringen (...).

Der Lebensmittelkonsum verursacht etwa 30 % des ökologischen Fußabdrucks Portugals und übertrifft damit die Emissionen durch den Transport. Der hohe Fleischkonsum, einschließlich Fisch, ist für 49 % des ernährungsbedingten ökologischen Fußabdrucks des Landes verantwortlich und übt Druck auf die lokalen Ökosysteme aus.

Mit dieser Aktualisierung des NECP kommt Portugal den europäischen Empfehlungen nach, die Finanzierung nachhaltiger landwirtschaftlicher Praktiken zu erhöhen und den Schwerpunkt auf pflanzliche Lebensmittel zu legen."

Quellen: ➡ LINK 1 ➡ LINK 2

CHANGE IS COMING! 😊💚

[judesbelligoal]

I just want 2 things for 2026. Neymar to be in the Brazil team and for them to win the World Cup. If not Brazil, Portugal because a Ronaldo win would be good. But I feel like Ronaldo is probably not gonna retire until he gets that World Cup lol, we might be seeing him in 2030

Hope he’s fit in 2026 cause u never know with neymar🥴 as a madridista, a cr7. World Cup win would mean the world to me

[azulpressagadir]

FIFA: Mondial-2030, La candidature Maroc-Espagne-Portugal se caractérise par “sa qualité d’ensemble”, dépasse “les exigences minimales d’organisation requises”

La candidature conjointe du Maroc, de l’Espagne et du Portugal pour l’organisation de la Coupe du Monde 2030, unique dossier en lice, se caractérise par “sa qualité d’ensemble” et dépasse “les exigences minimales d’organisation” requises dans l’évaluation technique, indique la Fédération internationale de football (FIFA) dans son rapport d’évaluation des candidatures. Au-delà des symboles, la…

[elkoko]

!VUELVE NARANJITO!

España, Portugal y Marruecos organizaran el Mundial 2030.

#naranjito #Mundial2030

[armatofu]

Señoras y señores, con ustedes, las POSIBLES sedes europeas y africanas del Mundial 2030, repartidas entre Marruecos, España y Portugal.

Recordemos que los partidos iniciales de la Copa del Mundo de los 100 años se llevarán adelante en Argentina, Paraguay y Uruguay.

[female-malice]

At the start of February, Ørsted, the world’s largest offshore wind developer, announced a major scaling back of its operations, exiting wind markets in Portugal, Spain and Norway and cutting both its dividend and its 2030 target for the number of new installations. The announcement followed the firm’s shock decision last November to back out of two major wind projects in New Jersey. Last week, it agreed to sell stakes in four US onshore wind farms for around $300m.

But Ørsted’s troubles are hardly unique. In September 2023, the UK government’s offshore wind auction failed to secure a single project from developers, who argued that the government-guaranteed prices on offer were too low in the face of rising costs. Two months before that, Vattenfall pulled out of a major wind UK development for the same reason. And in February, the German energy giant RWE – which provides 15 per cent of the UK’s power – warned that without more money on offer, the UK’s next auction, opening this month, might just fail again.

These cases are only a handful among many and have come as jarring setbacks for an industry grown accustomed to triumphalism: headlines over recent years have routinely celebrated the plunging cost of renewables and the seemingly unrelenting transition to clean energy advancing around the world. A quick Google of “renewable energy deployment” yields no shortage of charts with impressive upward slopes.

Much of this enthusiasm has centred on a metric called the Levelised Cost of Electricity (LCOE), which represents the average cost per unit of electricity generated over the lifetime of a generator, be it a wind farm or a gas power station. The LCOE has something of a cult status among industry analysts, journalists and even the International Energy Agency as the definitive marker of the transition to clean energy. When the LCOE of renewables falls below that of traditional fossil fuel sources, the logic goes, the transition to clean energy will be unstoppable. If only it was that simple, argues the economic geographer Brett Christophers in his latest book The Price is Wrong: Why Capitalism Won’t Save the Planet.

As Christophers writes: “Everyone, seemingly, has gravitated to the view that, now they are cheaper/cheapest, renewables are primed for an unprecedented golden growth era” that will see them supplant fossil fuels. Doing so will be no mean feat. Despite the vertiginous growth of new renewable capacity in recent years, renewables have scarcely made a dent in the proportion of global power that comes from fossil fuels. The overall share of fossil fuel power in the energy mix has remained broadly stagnant for an astonishing four decades, from 64 per cent in 1985 to 61 per cent in 2022. Critically, the absolute amount of fossil fuel power generated each year – the figure that ultimately matters for the climate – has continued to rise.

In large part, this stems from overall growth in electricity consumption, which will continue apace in the coming decades as millions around the world gain access to electricity and as we race to electrify the economy. Thus, for all their upward momentum, global electricity consumption is still growing faster than solar and wind power is coming online, meaning the gap is widening. To close it, by the IEA’s estimates, the world needs to install 600 GW (gigawatts) of solar and 340 GW of wind capacity every year between 2030 and 2050. By comparison, the UK’s current total installed wind capacity is approximately 30GW, the sixth largest in the world, while Germany’s domestic transition plan implies installing the equivalent of 43 football pitches of solar panels every day to 2050. In short: the task is immense – almost unimaginably so. It is similarly urgent.

Where will the momentum needed to build this clean energy future come from? As Christophers documents in detail, the industry has thus far relied on an array of subsidy and support around the world. Extensive state support is hardly unique to clean energy, much as detractors and climate deniers may like to highlight it: the fossil fuel industry benefited from tax breaks and direct subsidy to the tune of £5.5trn in 2022 according to the IMF. The declining LCOE of renewable energy has been increasingly viewed as an argument for unwinding this government-backed support. As Christophers shows, however, in practice this has proven a near-impossibility. The question he therefore asks is why, in the face of declining costs, subsidies continue to be necessary, and what this tells us about whether the current approach to decarbonisation is fit for purpose.

The answer, Christophers argues, is that we’ve got it all upside down. When it comes to investment in renewable energy, as in anything else, it’s not cheapness that matters. Just take it from the investors themselves, he notes, citing one former JPMorgan investor who described the LCOE as a “practical irrelevance”. What matters instead is profit, and expectations of it.

Despite its simplicity, Christophers’s account is a quietly radical one that contravenes the received wisdom of not only the technocrats, mainstream economists and free marketeers who tout the wonders of the market, but also many on the left, for whom the problem with profits is typically their being far too high. Instead, as he demonstrates, the trouble is that renewable energy is nowhere near profitable enough, and certainly not reliably so, for the market to deliver it with anything like the pace, scale or certainty that is needed.

If the costs of renewables are indeed so low, one might ask, and profits are equal to revenues minus costs, then surely plunging costs should mean higher profits. But Christophers shows that low and unreliable profits are the definitive obstacle to the decarbonisation of the electricity system and, by extension, the wider economy.

The precise answer as to why low costs don’t necessarily translate into high and steady profits in this sector is technically complex and multifaceted, deftly handled by Christophers, a reformed management consultant, over nearly 400 pages of fine detail drawn from company documents, interviews and dense sectoral reports from global energy agencies. Put simply, the core of the problem is that the very features of markets so celebrated by mainstream economics – mediation via the price signal, increasing competition and private investment – are the undoing of a private-sector led transition to clean energy.

For Christophers, the commitment to marketisation in electricity systems is increasingly self-defeating. At the heart of this problem is the so-called “wholesale market” that prevails in many parts of the US and Europe, including the UK. Under this system, generators are paid a single price per unit of electricity for a given period, regardless of whether it is derived from a wind turbine or a coal plant. This price is based on what’s called a “merit order”, with the cheapest sources – generally renewables – being deployed first, followed by as many sources as are needed in order of escalating price. The wholesale is set by the last unit of energy needed to meet demand. In the UK, this is typically gas.

The defining feature of this wholesale pricing system, cast in sharp relief over the period of sky-high energy prices in 2021-2022, is volatility. With a host of factors potentially feeding into the price – from the balance of supply and demand through to global gas prices and geographic location – the swings can be enormous, regularly spiking from double to triple digit prices and back again within a matter of hours. In times of crisis, the figures can become outlandish, with the price of electricity in Texas during the state’s 2021 shock winter storms reaching $9,000 per MWh.

For Christophers, this volatility is nothing short of “an existential threat” to the “bankability” of a renewable project – that is, its ability to secure financing – because it makes profitability so uncertain. Worse still, within a competitive wholesale market, as the proportion of renewable generation in the market grows, and by extension the proportion of time in which renewables drive the wholesale price, the more frequently and strongly prices swing to the lower extreme, a phenomenon known as “price cannibalisation”.

The energy industry and governments rely on an impressive array of methods to circumvent these problems, from financial hedging to feed-in-tariffs, and from mega corporate Power Purchase Agreements with the likes of Amazon and Google to the UK’s “contracts-for-difference”. As Christophers writes: the reality of “liberalised electricity systems such as Europe’s is that, to secure financing, renewables developers ordinarily do everything they can… to avoid selling their output at the market price.”

Thus, despite ultra-high wholesale prices over 2021-2022, many renewables generators failed to enjoy correspondingly high profits, because they had traded the possibility of these certainties in the face of intolerable market volatility. For Christophers, this is the “signal feature” of the liberalised electricity market: that “the hallowed market price… is the one price that renewables operators endeavour not to sell at.”

It is in explaining this apparent contradiction that the book offers its most radical suggestion. Borrowing Karl Polanyi’s concept of a “fictitious commodity”, Christophers ultimately contends that electricity – like land, labour and money, Polanyi’s original trio – is not a commodity in the conventional sense of having been created for sale, and is therefore ill-suited to market exchange and coordination. This incompatibility sits at the root of the spiralling complexity of interventions that policymakers are obligated to make in the name of upholding the freedom of the “market”. The result, in the words of the energy expert Meredith Angwin, is that today’s electricity markets are less market and more “bureaucratic thicket”.

Thankfully, if the forces of capitalism, defined in terms of private ownership and the profit imperative, are fundamentally ill-equipped for this task, then we are not for want of alternatives. Public ownership and financing of energy, if freed from a faux market and the straitjacket of the profit motive, seems an obvious one. Christophers writes that the state is the only actor with “both the financial wherewithal and the logistical and administrative capacity” to take on the challenge of decarbonisation. The trouble though, when all you have is a hammer, is that everything looks like a nail. Thus, in the face of irreconcilable market failures, most policymakers seem only to offer more market-based fudges.

In this context, the tremors in renewable energy investment that we have seen with increasing frequency over the past several months are more than just a blip. They represent a potentially fatal flaw in the prevailing approach to the task of decarbonisation. From the perspective of the climate, every tonne of carbon matters, and every delay is significant. To continue to leave the future of electricity, and by extension global decarbonisation, to the whims of profit-motivated firms, is an intolerable risk. Rome is already burning, and there’s no time left to fiddle.