Pond project at historic Wicklow house is Ireland's first finalist at European awards
The European Young Heritage Entrepreneur of the Year award rewards the spirit of sustainable innovation and entrepreneurship amongst young owners of historic houses across Europe. It is a European Historic Houses initiative and supported by Rothschild and Patrice Besse.
Thomas submitted a project involving the restoration of the pond at Altidore Castle in 2023.
Altidore Castle was built in the 1730s, with written records of the pond recorded shortly afterwards. The project lasted for several weeks and consisted of the digging out of the pond so silt and years of debris could be cleared out. The restoration project was funded through the Built Heritage Investment Scheme from Wicklow County Council.
Thomas said: 'It's such an honour to be the runner up in this prestigious prize and to get recognition for the sustainability work we have done at Altidore. As someone taking over a historic house and looking at the diversification of an estate towards more biodiversity and sustainable practices I am delighted to be a finalist.
"It was my first big project working with the county council and it's really amazing to see what a difference the project and the funding made. We also got advice from Historic Houses of Ireland who do such great work supporting privately built heritage.
"It took a year of planning and execution but heritage is not simply built heritage but the surroundings on an estate and any project maintaining heritage allows us to connect to the processes used in the past but also to bring forward those processes into the future.
"It's great for visitors when we're open to the public to see the pond back to its original glory. And of course we are delighted to see the huge increase in biodiversity in the pond from tadpoles to a few ducks and even a heron!'
Philip Emmet, owner of Altidore Castle and Thomas' father, said: 'I'm delighted, Altidore has been an organic farm for over thirty years and we have always had an eye towards biodiversity and sustainability.
"We planted three native woodlands twenty years ago and the river that runs through Altidore is a blue dot river, the highest designation. It's important that the next generation are always looking towards a greener future. I'm really proud of Thomas and his hard work.'
Altidore Castle is open to the public for house tours throughout May and will hold its first biodiversity walk on Saturday, May 24.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Journal
11 hours ago
- The Journal
Airport passenger cap: Attorney general has given his advice, but there are 'no easy options'
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL has provided legal options to Transport Minister Darragh O'Brien on the Dublin Airport passenger cap. Speaking to The Journal this week, the minister confirmed he is 'looking at options' provided to him by the state's legal adviser. 'I have received initial advices from the Attorney General's office in relation to options that would be available there on a legislative basis. None of them are easy, I would say that. But we're working through them,' he said. In April, the High Court suspended the Dublin Airport passenger cap beyond the summer after a number of key issues relating to the case were referred to Europe. The minister said the status quo has remained in place this year and will continue 'more than likely for most of next year'. He said this time period of around two years will give the government time to consider and possibly pass any legislation required. Advertisement 'I don't want to see the airport numbers restricted through a cap,' he added. Ryanair boss Michael O'Leary slammed the government last month for the slow pace of action, criticising the government for not passing legislation to scrap the cap within the first six months of the government's term. 'We are now seven weeks' out from the Dáil's summer recess so the time for 'stakeholder meetings' and government waffle is over. Ireland demands action,' O'Leary said in a statement. DAA chief executive Kenny Jacobs said this month that the government should publish legislation this autumn to end the limit on passengers at Dublin Airport. Taoiseach Micheál Martin has previously said it is 'imperative' the passenger cap is lifted. The airport operator, DAA, previously applied to Fingal County Council to raise the cap from 32 million to 40 million passengers in December 2023. The cap on passenger numbers was a condition of planning permission for Terminal 2 in 2007. Related Reads Passenger cap lift: Solar panels at Dublin Airport will not compensate for more people flying Everything you need to know about Dublin Airport's passenger cap - and why airlines despise it 'I'm not rejecting science, I'm supporting the economy': DAA boss defends plan to increase flights O'Brien said 'to be fair' to Fingal County Council, the planning condition has been in since 2008 and 'DAA didn't act upon removing that condition for 10 years'. 'I would encourage the DAA to continue to actively engage with the planning authority, and they need to do that,' said the minister. Nighttime flights Separately, the Business Post reported last week that Aer Lingus had warned the minister that curbs on night time flights would result in 'devastating revenue losses' for airlines on European and North Atlantic routes and would 'jeopardise the economic viability' of commercial carriers. O'Brien told The Journal that there is an important decision on night flights from An Bord Pleanala in the coming weeks. 'I live beside the airport. I see the airport as a really important economic driver for the state, but really important for connectivity… I've always been clear to DAA about the responsibility they have to be a good neighbour, particularly with the adjacent communities,' he said. Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone... A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation. Learn More Support The Journal
RTÉ News
12 hours ago
- RTÉ News
EU and US sanctions on Russia: Timing is everything ahead of G7 summit
As G7 leaders converge on Kananaskis in the Canadian Rockies this weekend, the prospect of decisively tougher sanctions on Russia will loom large. The Ukraine War is reaching another inflection point: Vladimir Putin has intensified missile and drone attacks on Ukrainian cities and there are fears a Russian ground offensive is imminent. While President Trump has been publicly frustrated with Mr Putin's relentless attacks on civilian targets, he keeps deferring a tougher response. Over the next 10 days, a key NATO summit in The Hague, and a meeting of EU leaders in Brussels, will further clarify Mr Trump's intentions when it comes to Ukraine and the broader issue of European security. Supporters of Ukraine, therefore, are banking on harsher sanctions to convince Russia to move towards the 30-day ceasefire to which Ukraine has in principle already agreed. There is also a growing consensus that Russia's economy, despite weathering the sanctions better than expected, could be more vulnerable than the regime is claiming. This week the European Commission tabled its 18th sanctions package, aimed at stopping the flow of refined Russian crude oil into Europe, while simultaneously pushing to lower the oil price cap agreed by the G7. In July, the Commission will also propose a complete phase out of Russian fossil fuels, especially LNG. In tandem, two US senators Lindsay Graham (Rep) and Richard Blumenthal (Dem) have been promoting a bill which would, in the words of its authors, put "bone-crushing" pressure on Russia by hitting countries which continue to buy its oil with 500% tariffs. Both gambits face formidable challenges. The cap on the price Russia can sell its seaborne crude oil was set at $60 per barrel by a joint decision of the G7 and EU member states in December 2022. The idea was to ensure that the global south did not suffer from a complete ban (which would also have pushed up prices and therefore the Kremlin's revenues), whereas a cap would keep the oil flowing but with less benefit to Russia. 'Shadow fleet' The price cap was policed through the west's virtual monopoly on maritime insurance. To circumvent the cap, Russia began buying end-of-life vessels, effectively creating a parallel shipping network with dubious insurance - what became known as the "shadow fleet". The EU and G7 then sanctioned individual ships: the US hit 200 vessels, the EU 154 and the UK 177. As a result, ports became increasingly unwilling to let these oil tankers dock while flag states like Panama and Honduras were de-registering them (on Wednesday the EU added an additional 77 shadow fleet vessels to the sanctions list). Experts suggest Russia, which still gets one third of its export revenues from crude oil, is still finding ways to circumvent the price cap. However, the EU believes it has significantly reduced oil revenues. India, Turkey and China - the biggest buyers of Russian oil - have been pressuring Moscow to sell its crude below the price cap, officials say. Now, the EU wants to push the price cap lower. Notwithstanding the spike in prices following Israel's attack against Iran, the traded price of crude this year has fallen to around $65 a barrel, rendering the $60 cap ineffective. This week European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen proposed lowering it to $45. This was deliberately timed ahead of the G7 summit: Europe cannot do this alone. The Commission believes that most G7 partners are on board, but not yet the Trump administration. Scott Bessent, the Treasury Secretary, is sceptical and reportedly insisted that a reference to a lower price cap be dropped from the final communiqué of last month's G7 finance ministers meeting in Banff, Alberta. While EU officials say the work to convince President Trump will continue, it may be that the six other G7 countries go it alone, given that the UK and EU between them cover most of the elements (ie, identifying the shadow fleet and maritime insurance). Sources admit, however, that the decision-making process within the Trump administration is "difficult to predict". Brussels is also proposing a ban on any EU operator engaging in transactions, either directly or indirectly, via the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines, and also wants to curb the amount of Russian crude making its way into member states through the back door because it has been refined and relabelled elsewhere. Officials admit there are conflicting figures as to how much relabelled Russian crude - mostly refined in India and Turkey - is entering Europe. India and Turkey imported 1.7 million barrels per day of Russian crude in the first quarter of 2025, according to LSEG data; EU member states imported more than 350,000 barrels from both countries in the same period. EU officials say the burden of proof would be switched to the exporting countries to show that the refined oil is not originally Russian, but that could be tricky. "The [European] Commission implementing such a ban would be difficult, given that refiners blend different types of crude oil," writes Warren Patterson, head of commodities strategy with ING. "Determining the origin of the crude oil becomes challenging." The Kremlin is publicly unperturbed. "Naturally, Russia has not been living under restrictions for just a day," spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said this week. "We have long operated under such conditions, which we continue to regard as unlawful. Russia has gained valuable and substantial experience that allows us to minimize the adverse effects of such measures." The Commission has also proposed cutting off a further 22 Russian banks from the Swift international payments system and converting the partial ban on financial institutions to a full ban. The 18th sanctions package could be agreed by the end of the month, with the usual caveat of potential objections by Hungary and Slovakia. Robert Fico, Slovakia's pro-Russian prime minister, has warned he would not support the package - which requires unanimity - unless the Commission provides a solution to the problems caused by a full phase out of Russia fuel. In reality, it has been the contradictory response by the Trump administration to the Ukraine War that has pushed the EU into launching what could be its toughest sanctions package yet. In Kyiv, on 10 May, the leaders of Ukraine, Britain, France, Germany and Poland had called on Russia - on the assumption they had the backing of the Trump administration - to agree to an immediate 30-day ceasefire or face massive sanctions. Instead, the US President enthusiastically backed a call by Vladimir Putin to start talks in Istanbul the following week (with no commitment to a ceasefire). Mr Putin refused to attend the talks, which were conducted by a low-level Russian delegation, and has since intensified air attacks while continuing to insist on his maximalist war aims. Moscow appears convinced that military gains and the demoralisation of the Ukrainian population are a better bet than ceasefires. "The aim of the [18th sanctions] package is to increase pressure on Russia and to make it agree to negotiate with sincere intentions," says Svitlana Taran, an analyst with the European Policy Centre (EPC). "At the moment Russia is engaging in negotiations, but without any real intention to actually negotiate. Russia still thinks that it can win. Moscow is confident they still have more potential to sustain a war of attrition against Ukraine than Ukraine does." In the absence of tougher action from the White House, US senators Lindsey Graham and Richard Blumenthal are currently pushing a bill through the Senate which would - if approved by President Trump - allow for tariffs of 500% on countries which are continuing to buy Russian crude oil, gas, uranium and other exports. The bill currently has 82 sponsors on both sides of the aisle with Graham - regarded as a weathervane on Republican sentiment towards Ukraine - and Blumenthal hopeful it can be adopted before the 4 July recess. Supporters of the bill complain that Mr Putin has been stringing the US president along and has no incentive to get to the negotiating table in the absence of tougher measures. 'Making astronomically high tariffs the center of US policy toward Russia's war is misguided' But the Sanctioning Russia Act (SRA2025) is not without its critics. President Trump would have to determine every 90 days that Mr Putin is refusing to negotiate a peace agreement at which point sanctions would be mandatory. These would be on President Putin himself, on Russian oligarchs and on banks and other financial institutions. But the most eye-catching element is the 500% tariffs on countries buying Russian crude oil. Since China is among the biggest purchasers, this would upend the current negotiations between Washington and Beijing on averting a damaging trade war. "Making astronomically high tariffs the center of US policy toward Russia's war is misguided: a threat that will never be carried out lacks real coercive power," argues Stephen Sestanovich of the Council on Foreign Relations. "And a bill that stops all trade with the United States' most important commercial partners is precisely that kind of threat." The authors of the bill insist it is designed precisely to focus minds and to convince Mr Putin that he cannot maintain his war effort for another two or three years. "Russia is in a very perilous state already economically, because 40 percent of its economy is devoted to war production or compensation for soldiers," Senator Blumenthal said during a recent visit to Kyiv. "It's only real source of revenue is oil and gas and other similar energy products, of which 70 percent is sold to India and China together." While Lindsey Graham stresses he has worked closely with the White House in formulating the bill, President Trump has been urging him to water down key aspects and has made his distaste for some of the elements clear. EU officials, while supportive of the need for tougher US pressure on Moscow, are aware of this. "I'm not convinced that the bill will be what gets adopted, even if Trump decides to put sanctions on Putin," says a senior EU source. "These bills in the Senate are notoriously aspirational until the White House gets at them and says: this is what's actually realistic. [Senator] Graham won't do anything without Trump's approval." Russian economy 'clearly heading toward zero growth' Yet, there is a growing body of opinion that this is precisely the time to hit the Russian economy. On paper, Moscow has weathered the sanctions well since 2022. While the economy contracted by 2.1% in 2022, there was economic growth in the following two years as Russia switched to a military economy, deepened trade links with China and India, availed of windfall fossil fuel profits and used its accumulated reserves as a buffer against the sharp decline in exports. This allowed Mr Putin to pour huge resources into military spending. Between 2011 and 2021 the defense budget averaged $53 billion per year. In 2022 it rose to $79 billion and $94 billion in 2023. Last year, defence spending soared to $140 billion, while this year it will eat up 32.2% of the federal budget. Such spending has allowed the Kremlin to mute popular unease about the war by boosting military salaries and social benefits, while buying off business elites. Pouring money into the military industrial complex has generated its own economic growth. However, there are strong indications that this formula is running out of road. Up to a million able-bodied Russians are thought to have left the country either in protest or to avoid being drafted, and while up to half have returned the civilian economy is deemed dangerously starved of labour. That has forced companies to boost salaries so they can compete with military pay, which in turn has fueled inflation. To cut inflation from its current rate of 10.2%, the Russian central bank has raised interest rates to over 20%. In March, President Putin called on his government not to strangle growth in its fight against inflation, while Alexander Shokhin, president of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs, warned Russia was "clearly heading…toward zero growth." A report this week by the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CISS) concludes that Russia has reached the limit of massive state spending on the military sector, with the side-effects of prolonged sanctions, soaring inflation and interest rates starting to bite. "Russia's current account remains the country's most glaring economic vulnerability," the report says. "A dramatic drop in export revenues, a surge in capital flight, or a further increase in the country's import costs, if timed fortuitously, could push Russia in the direction of a balance of payments crisis." 'Good-cop-bad-cop' tactics The growing frustration in Washington at the Kremlin's unrelenting assault on civilians appears to have prompted a change in heart. While the Biden administration steered clear of tough sanctions against Russia's energy sector until the very end of his tenure, and those countries filling Mr Putin's war coffers by buying its crude oil paid no penalty, there is today a change in mood. It is true that European countries which continue to rely on Russian oil could be caught up in the US tariffs. Lindsey Graham insists there will be exemptions for countries that have supported Ukraine's defence. A much tougher bipartisan response from Congress could provide President Trump with a 'good-cop-bad-cop' tactic to be used on Mr Putin, notwithstanding his tendency to cut the Russian president a very generous amount of slack. Brussels would prefer to act in tandem with Washington. However, observers point to Europe's complete oil embargo on Iran in 2009, and how it pushed the country to negotiate the 2015 nuclear deal, as an argument for going it alone. "Just as the EU oil embargo on Iran helped spur action in Washington a decade and a half ago, major new EU sanctions on Russia could do the same today," writes Edward Fishman, a former Obama administration official in Foreign Affairs. "Instead of waiting around for Mr Trump, Brussels should advance new penalties on Russia's energy sector. Even unilateral EU measures would tighten the screws on Moscow - and could prompt Washington to follow suit."
Sunday World
a day ago
- Sunday World
Liverpool agree potential British record deal for Florian Wirtz
Premier League champions Liverpool have agreed a club-record deal worth up to £116million to sign Florian Wirtz after Bayer Leverkusen finally settled on a fee for their playmaker. The Reds had two bids rejected, the last one of £113m which would have seen £100m paid up front with performance-related add-ons, but have finally got the deal over the line. Liverpool will still pay an initial £100m – comfortably surpassing their own record outlay – but the performance-related add-ons, if achieved, would make it a potential British record. Liverpool have broken their club record to sign Bayer Leverkusen's Florian Wirtz (Peter Byrne/PA) Leverkusen had valued the 22-year-old Germany international around £125m but regardless, Liverpool's overall outlay could surpass the £115m Chelsea paid Brighton in 2023 for Moises Caicedo – who turned down Anfield after the Seagulls had accepted an offer which was subsequently matched by their Premier League rivals. Striker Darwin Nunez was their previous record signing in 2022, although they have not paid the full £85m as he has not met all the requirements for certain add-ons to be due. Liverpool, like a number of top European clubs, had been watching Wirtz for some time but did not consider themselves front-runners for his signature. However, after Manchester City pulled out, reportedly due to the spiralling costs of the whole package, and Wirtz expressed a preference for Merseyside over Bayern Munich, sporting director Richard Hughes changed gear. The signing of Florian Wirtz will take Liverpool's summer spending close to £200million (Matthias Schrader/AP) Talks were already ongoing with Leverkusen over Jeremie Frimpong, who became the first new addition to Arne Slot's squad in a £30m deal late last month, which made the line of communication easier. Hughes' connections with his former club Bournemouth mean he was also well-placed to progress talks with the Cherries over the signing of left-back Milos Kerkez, a player he originally brought to the Premier League. The full extent of Wirtz's fee will only be paid if Liverpool enjoy a sustained level of elite success and the club's view is that should that be the case, the considerable cost will have been recouped on the pitch. With Kerkez next on the list their summer spending could edge close to £200m, made possible by financial discipline in the last two windows which saw only Federico Chiesa brought in for a cut-price £10m last August. Milos Kerkez has been linked with a move from Bournemouth to Liverpool (Nick Potts/PA) That approach was justified when Slot's team won the title but with their rivals strengthening it was apparent additions were required in certain areas. It is likely to be their biggest summer window since 2018 when Naby Keita, Fabinho, Xherdan Shaqiri and Alisson Becker were recruited for around £170m, with Virgil van Dijk having signed for £75m the previous January. Owners Fenway Sports Group have, despite their 'Moneyball' reputation, not been afraid to splash out big fees for transformative players like Van Dijk and Alisson – and Wirtz, one of the hottest prospects in Europe, falls into that category. The fact the forward, who only turned 22 a month ago, opted for Anfield over more lucrative offers from other European clubs is also seen as validation of the work Slot has done and the squad he already has at his disposal.
