NoneBy Salim Umar Ibrahim, Kano The Deputy President of the Senate, Senator Barau I Jibrin, on Sunday, paid a condolence visit to the family of late Senator Aminu Inuwa. Senator Inuwa, who represented the Kano Central Senatorial District under the Social Democratic Party (SDP) in the 3rd Republic, died on Friday. Barau prayed for his soul to rest in peace, saying the late Senator, “was an esteemed elder statesman who dedicated his life to serving Allah and humanity.” He also visited families of four other political associates and condoled the families over their losses. Nigeria’s economy in crisis: A call for urgent action from President Tinubu Gov Okpebholo sets up panel to probe Obaseki The Senator was at the residence of his political adviser, Hon. Yusuf Aliyu Tumfafi, in Daurawa, Tarauni Local Government Area of Kano, to extend his condolences over the recent passing of his brother. Barau also paid a condolence visit to the former Speaker of the Kano State House of Assembly, Hon. Balarabe Saidu Gani over the passing of his father, Alhaji Saidu Sale Gani. Still in Kano Municipal, his entourage moved to NNDC Quarters and condoled with the family of Alhaji Zubairu Dambatta, a former executive of the Nigerian Port Authority (NPA), who recently passed away at 75. He then proceeded to Layin Tagwayen Gida in Dala LGA to once again extend his condolences to Comrade Alasan Uba Idris on the death of his elder sister. During the visits, prayers were offered for the souls of the deceased. “May Allah (SWT) grant them Aljannatul Firdausi and provide their loved ones with the strength to endure these irreparable losses,” Barau prayed. Join Daily Trust WhatsApp Community For Quick Access To News and Happenings Around You. NEWS UPDATE: Nigerians have been finally approved to earn Dollars from home, acquire premium domains for as low as $1500, profit as much as $22,000 (₦37million+). Click here to start. Barau Jibrin condolence visit late Sen Aminu Inuwa's family
As the climate changes, so too should our expectations of nature — and just how much it will put up with. Take so-called carbon sinks. This term refers to reservoirs, natural or otherwise, that absorb more carbon dioxide than they emit, helping to regulate the Earth’s temperature and keep the worst outcomes of climate change at bay. Forests and plants, soils and the ocean all do this vital yet underappreciated work. But they have their limit, and last year demonstrated that. In a typical year, forests and land absorb about 30 per cent of the carbon emissions we release. However, in 2023, the warmest year on record, land-based carbon sinks soaked up almost zero CO2 as a net category, according to from a team of international researchers that was recently highlighted by . The severity of droughts and wildfires experienced last year, particularly here in Canada, helps to explain the drop-off in carbon absorption: droughts diminish the land’s capacity for carbon uptake, while fires transform a forest from a CO2 sponge into a tail pipe. “The sudden collapse of carbon sinks was not factored into climate models — and could rapidly accelerate global heating,” Patrick Greenfield, The Guardian’s biodiversity and environment reporter. The reaction to this research among climate watchers was swift. Many fretted over the prospect of an accelerated climate crisis. , noting that 2023 coincided with an extreme El Nino, which typically brings warmer and drier weather, increasing the likelihood of drought and fires. So, just how worried should we be? Ahead of COP29, which , the Star asked climate scientist Damon Matthews for his two cents. Matthews is a professor at Concordia University and the co-creator of the , a digital countdown that shows how much time is left before human-driven CO2 emissions push global temperatures past a 1.5 degrees C increase over pre-industrial levels, the threshold agreed upon in the 2015 Paris Climate Accords. , scientists predict even more extreme weather, pressures on agriculture and access to water, an increased risk of insect-borne disease and more. The clock currently says we’re six years away from crossing that red line if current trends continue. And there’s no sign they won’t. We should be much more worried that we haven’t decreased our emissions. Fundamentally, if we don’t decrease our emissions really fast none of the other pieces are going to matter. So fire is really important, and that’s one of the reasons we need to decrease our emissions, because there is a limit to the earth’s capacity to absorb the carbon we put into the atmosphere ... The biggest reason for concern is that we’re still cutting down the Amazon forests and in Canada, we’re still cutting down forests that otherwise would be absorbing carbon from the atmosphere. And to me, from a climate perspective, it’s a much bigger concern than the extent of forest fires in a particular year ... and that’s something we can control. There is a tendency to think of the boreal forest or Canada’s ecosystems as a contribution to climate mitigation. And I think (with) the immediate implication of increasing fire severity in Canada, that argument falls apart ... We’re not going to achieve our net zero target by 2050 by relying on Canada’s forests to absorb carbon ... In order to reach that target, we need to decarbonize the energy system. And if we don’t do that, whatever happens with the landmass is not even going to make a dent in our emissions. And so part of the upshot of this story, and also the wildfire trends over the last decade, is that it’s more and more the case that the net carbon balance of Canada’s land mass is not going to be helpful in achieving that net zero. And probably by the time we get to 2050, it may actually be a source of carbon rather than a sink. The short answer is no. We do have conservation targets in Canada. And there is a recognition that conserving forests is important, and (addressing) climate (change) is a part of that rationale. I think those targets are more related to biodiversity targets than climate targets probably. So, I don’t think there’s a lot of understanding that any kind of disturbance in the forest system is going to lead to less carbon in that system. And that the number one disturbance is actually human activity, not forest fires. Meeting the would be a good start. I think acknowledging and empowering Indigenous governance of land would be another really good step in the right direction. Recognizing that any industrial operation that occurs in a forested landscape is going to affect the carbon of that landscape, and that should be measured and reported and acknowledged. I mean the oil sands in Alberta is having a pretty negative effect on carbon sink capacity, totally aside from all of the oil being brought out. On balance, I haven’t seen any evidence that models are out to lunch in terms of how they’re representing land carbon uptake (which is) . And also land carbon uptake is only one piece of the climate picture in general. I think it’s a difficult question because there is a tendency for the news media to take a lot of individual scientific findings and say, ‘This is the thing that’s going to convince the world that we need to take climate change seriously.’ And partly because it’s so hard to get the world to take climate change seriously. And so I support that because we do need to take climate change seriously. At the same time, the fact that 2023 year was a bad year for land carbon uptake does not mean that the world is collapsing. Even if the world might be collapsing. It’s not because of that. That’s just the latest symptom. Absolutely. We should also be heeding warnings that the world’s coral reefs are at the verge of collapse because of warming ocean temperatures and that hurricanes are getting stronger and stronger over time because of warmer ocean temperatures. Even if you live in your little Canadian bubble and all you can talk about is hockey, you should be really concerned that we’re not gonna be able to skate outdoors in Canada within 20 years. It’s very expensive and very hard to do at any scale right now. Most people who talk about carbon removal see this as a multi-decadal process of building the capacity and the technologies. And at some point, later in the century, we might be able to compensate for those emissions that we are not able to get rid of through decarbonization. We would have to have an entirely parallel energy system devoted only to carbon removal to absorb all of our emissions. It’s the most simple and it’s generally the cheapest option. Certainly, the only certain solution ... We don’t really know how to prevent the land from emitting carbon very well ... But we do know that if we decommission all of the coal plants in Canada and replace them with solar and wind, that is going to decrease emissions. We know that. And so why not just do that instead of worrying about all the other stuff that’s a lot harder. It is sometimes, yeah.
VERIFYING 6 kinds of social media scamsHowever, it was not just the attacking players who shone in the match. The defensive solidity displayed by Liverpool was equally impressive, with the backline holding firm and denying Girona any real chances on goal. The presence of Virgil van Dijk at the heart of the defense provided assurance and leadership, showing why he is considered one of the best center-backs in the world.
As the narrative unfolds, the stakes are raised to new heights as our beloved demon slayers face their most formidable adversary yet. The enigmatic figure of the Infinity Castle looms ominously in the background, shrouded in mystery and danger. With stunning visuals and heart-pounding action sequences, the trailer hints at a riveting storyline that will keep audiences on the edge of their seats from start to finish.