Warning that Vladimir Putin could launch chilling attack by blocking the sun
Defence experts have stressed that Vladimir Putin could use geoengineering to transform weather systems and disrupt the UK. It has been reported that officials have been warned about the risks of an 'independent or third-party actor' performing the strike.
If such an attack was to happen, the health of humans and wildlife would be severely impacted. The economic impact to industries such as farming would be huge as crops would also die and solar power plants would be useless.
Solar geoengineering is the study of how to manipulate of the amount of radiation reaching the Earth from the sun. One method of enacting a dimming of the rays coming from the sun can be to fire aerosols into the atmosphere. The aerosols would react in the atmosphere and block energy from the sun, reflecting it back into space, Mirror UK reports.
The Telegraph reports that Kerry McCarthy, the UK's climate minister, wrote in a letter: 'The UK is a longstanding leader on climate action and an active international collaborator in scientific research. The Government recognises the need to understand the risks and impacts of [solar radiation modification] approaches that could be deployed by an independent or third-party actor. Robust scientific evidence is essential for informing responsible and inclusive governance.'
Sun dimming is being studied widely across the world at present as scientists look at the idea as a way to tackle climate change, global temperature rises and diminishing ice levels in the poles. In Britain, the Advanced Research and Innovation Agency (ARIA) is a government backed body with more than £60m (€70m) of funding to look into the technology.
Aside from the environmental study of sun dimming, or Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) as it is known, defence expert Matt Ince, from Dragonfly Intelligence, told the Telegraph hostile powers around the world may also be seeking to exploit SRM to use against the UK.
Mr Ince said: 'In a context where we've had, for example, Russia increasingly expanding its use of hybrid warfare activities, it's possible – not immediately, but down the line – that they may look to broaden and diversify the types of activities that they're conducting, to include more novel types of activity of which solar geoengineering may be one.
'Not least because of its relative affordability and the feasibility of conducting it, but also because it would allow a relative degree of plausible deniability. We've seen migration patterns being intentionally influenced by the Russian state as a way of trying to push more pressure on to European countries.'
Mr Ince added that 'some sort of intentionally orchestrated environmental disaster' is an 'avenue that Russia may pursue'. More than 550 concerned academics recently penned an open letter to the calling for SRM use to be globally controlled. The letter added: "Without effective global and democratic controls, the geopolitics of possible unilateral deployment of solar geoengineering would be frightening and inequitable."
And Dan Marks, a research fellow in energy security at the Royal United Services Institute, told the Telegraph there were questions about what could be done if a country did deploy SRM in a hostile way. He added: "If a country decided to deploy that kind of technology, then there is a real question of how do you treat that legally? How do you treat it diplomatically?"
Lt Gen Richard Nugee, the former Ministry of Defence non-executive director for climate change and sustainability, said SRM had not been "weaponised" yet and there could be "too may variables" for it to have "guaranteed output".
An Aria spokesman said: 'In line with the Government's position on SRM deployment, Aria is not funding deployment, and does not support, the deployment of any climate cooling approaches.'
A UK Government spokesman said: 'The government is not in favour of using solar radiation modification, but we support cautious, controlled research aimed at improving our understanding of its risks and impacts. The Government supports Aria's mission to fund high-risk, high-reward transformational research programmes with long-term benefits.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Examiner
8 minutes ago
- Irish Examiner
Analog Devices' Limerick unit pays out dividends of $5.42bn
The main Irish arm of semiconductor manufacturer Analog Devices has paid out combined dividends of $5.42bn (€4.67bn) this year and in 2024. New accounts show that the Limerick-based Analog Devices International UC has paid out the dividends as profits decreased by 72% to $487.78m in the 12 months to the end of November 2, 2024. The drop in profits arose mainly from non-cash amortisation costs rising from $2.04bn to $2.73bn. Revenues at the firm increased by 4% from $8.18bn to $8.55bn during the 12-month period. In May 2023, the firm announced plans to build a €630m facility in Co Limerick, adding 600 jobs to its Irish workforce. The investment at its European regional headquarters in the Raheen Business Park involved the construction of a 45,000sq ft research, development, and manufacturing facility. The directors said the results for 2024 'were in line with expectations'. They said dividends of $3.18bn were paid during 2024 and in a post-balance sheet event the company paid further dividends of $2.247bn to Analog Devices Limerick UC. Numbers employed increased by 131 from 1,626 to 1,757 during 2024. Staff was made up of 741 in manufacturing, 634 in engineering, 308 in marketing and 74 in administration as staff costs marginally increased to $195.77m. The directors said gross margin decreased primarily as a result of a change in product mix. They said the operating profit has decreased due mainly to the $695.9m increase in the amortisation of intangible assets while there was also an increase in distribution and administrative expenses of $388m to $1.83bn. The company recorded post-tax profits of $398.7m after incurring a corporation tax charge of $89m. Sounding an upbeat note, the directors said: 'Our diversified business model combined with our leading technology portfolio position the company to deliver sustainable long-term growth in the years ahead'. The directors said the company has a purpose-built European Research and Development Building at their Limerick campus and the R&D spend last year totalled $1bn - up from a spend of $615.2m in 2023 on the design, development and improvement of new and existing products and manufacturing processes. Directors' pay totalled $2.19m made up of emoluments of $715,000, $1.42m on a long-term incentive scheme and $54,000 in pension contributions. At the end of December, the firm had shareholder funds of $26.74bn. The company's cash funds increased from €163m to €570.73m.
Irish Independent
2 days ago
- Irish Independent
Steve Dempsey: Big Tech bleating about EU AI rules little more than a fear of a basic level of oversight and respect for copyright
At the heart of much of the discussion here is whether the need for AI innovation trumps existing copyright laws. The US sees itself in an AI race with China, while Europe has been more focused on protecting citizens and existing rights. The European Commission recently published implementation guidelines relating to the EU AI act. These include details of legal obligations for the safe use of AI, copyright protections for creators, and transparency rules around how AI models are trained. As Europe has a track record of creating de facto rules for the West around tech legislation, it's worth understanding how these implementation guidelines have been greeted. Last week a consortium that represents rights holders from across the media, music, film & TV, books and publishing and art worlds came out against the AI guidelines. Ironically, there isn't a creative name among the host of acronyms representing the creative industries. There's AEPO-ARTIS, BIEM, CISAC, ECSA, FIM, GESAC, ICMP, IMPALA and more. Their point is clear, though. In an open letter, they claim that the European Commission's official guidance on the copyright and transparency obligations contained in the EU AI Act favours tech companies over creators and copyright owners. Their concern is that the new AI regulations will solely benefit the AI companies that scrape their copyrighted content without permission to build and train models. The letter says: 'We are contending with the seriously detrimental situation of generative AI companies taking our content without authorisation on an industrial scale in order to develop their AI models. Their actions result in illegal commercial gains and unfair competitive advantages for their AI models, services, and products, in violation of European copyright laws.' Big tech, which seems to have more lobbying muscle than coding muscle these days, is not presenting a unified front. Google has said it will sign the EU's AI code of practice but warned that the Act and the Code could make Europe an AI laggard. Kent Walker, president of global affairs and chief legal officer at Google's parent company Alphabet, ominously warned: 'Departures from EU copyright law, steps that slow approvals, or requirements that expose trade secrets could chill European model development and deployment, harming Europe's competitiveness.' OpenAI and the French artificial intelligence company, Mistral are also onboard. And Microsoft will more than likely sign too. But Meta, Facebook's parent company, is against the code. They believe it introduces a number of legal uncertainties for model developers and measures that go beyond the scope of the AI Act. Like Google, they're warning that this will throttle the development and deployment of frontier AI models in Europe, and stunt European companies looking to build businesses on top of them. Facebook knows all about how to use FOMO. And it's working. There's been another open letter, this time from the chief executives of large European companies, including Airbus and BNP Paribas, urging a two-year pause by Brussels and warning that unclear and overlapping regulations were threatening the bloc's competitiveness in the global AI race. With all these talking heads, commercial imperative and AI hype cycle, it's easy to forget what all this hot air is about. The issue here is Article 53 of the AI act that introduces transparency into the heart of general-purpose AI model deployment. This article stipulates that AI providers must create and maintain detailed technical documentation covering the AI model's design, development, training data, evaluation, testing, intended tasks, architecture, licensing and energy metrics. All of this must be available to the EU AI Office and national authorities on request. It also must be available in relation to any other downstream systems that integrate the model in question. Article 53 also ensures model providers adhere to EU copyright law and must publicly publish a detailed summary of the training data used. This aims to shed light on datasets, sources, and potential inclusion of copyrighted material. So really, all this quibbling boils down to a level of transparency, societal oversight and a respect for copyright. It's understandable that technology companies are bristling. China isn't tying itself up in this level of bureaucracy, right? The EU's history with tech regulation, such as the GDPR, have often set up roadblocks for users rather than truly protecting privacy. And there's a significant opportunity cost to complying with this level of oversight. How is big tech supposed to move fast and break things with European technocrats looking over their shoulders? But then again, maybe that's the point. When it comes to a technology that might take all our jobs or wipe us all out – depending on who you talk to – maybe a bit of technocratic oversight isn't a bad thing? We know from recent history what happens if Silicon Valley's needs are put ahead of society's. Perhaps the artists and creators who have warned against favouring big tech capital over copyright aren't just protecting their own livelihoods. They're doing us all a favour.
The Irish Sun
3 days ago
- The Irish Sun
Britain's most stolen phones in 2025 revealed – with the SAME brand being a top choice for thieves
Plus what to do if your phone is stolen GADGET GRAB Britain's most stolen phones in 2025 revealed – with the SAME brand being a top choice for thieves Britain's most stolen phones of 2025 have been revealed with the same brand being a top choice for thieves. Figures show that phone thefts in Britain peak over the summer months coinciding with travel, festivals and shopping. 2 Britain's most stolen phones of 2025 have been revealed Credit: PA 2 It comes amid a phone theft epidemic in the UK Credit: AFP Nearly two in five mobiles stolen across Europe are taken in the UK despite making up less than 10 per cent of European customers. The figures come from SquareTrade, an American company that offers gadget insurance across Europe. They told a shocking story with a 425 per cent increase since June 2021. And the latest figures from the Crime Survey for England and Wales show that "theft from the person" increased 50 per cent in 2024. Topping the list of the most stolen phone is the iPhone 15 Pro Max. Released in 2023, The Sun described it at the time as the "new crowning jewel" of Apple's smartphone empire. It was the first time the tech giant switched to a titanium design compared to a stainless steel frame. The device also came with an Action Button for the first time after ditching the Mute Switch as well as a the super fast A17 Pro chip. It was also fitted with a 48-megapixel quad-pixel camera that delivers extremely detailed photos with particular improvements to low-light photography as well as an increased optical zoom. And despite being nearly two years old, the official Apple store still sells the devices from £800 down from £1,199 when they were initially released. Met Police seize 1,000 stolen phones in a week and arrest 230 people With 80 per cent of stolen devices in the UK being iPhones it's no surprise that second on the list is the iPhone 16 Pro Max. The newest Apple model on the market, The Sun tried the iPhone 16 for a week in September 2024. Out of the new iPhone 16 line-up the Pro Max easily came out on top. It has the biggest screen of any iPhone ever with a whopping 6.9-inch display and can currently be purchased from the Apple store for £1,199. For such a lofty sum of money, users get an upgraded A18 Pro Chip which powers a whole host of behind-the-scenes AI features. And there's a new 48-megapixel Fusion camera that's capable of shooing 4K video in Dolby Vision at a staggeringly high 120 frames per second. But the thing that impressed most by far was the ludicrous battery life with the workhorse device boasting 33 hours of video playback before it runs out. Coming in at third place on the list is the Samsung S24 Ultra, released at the beginning of 2024. Heavy on AI features, it even features the technology in its numerous high quality cameras. The device's stunning night-defying camera, hefty battery and solid premium style beat the iPhone in our review of the phone. This is perhaps reflected in the price with a £1,250 price tag at the time of release. It's not surprising that the three most stolen devices all cost more than £1,000. But beyond the cost of the device, criminals are also targeting phones for access to sensitive data, including banking apps, crypto wallets and personal accounts. London also lies at the centre of the phone theft epidemic according to the insurance claims data. Just this week giant signs were painted on Oxford street to warn Londoners to get off their phones amid record high snatches.
