Thursday, May 28, 2026
Home Blog Page 2442

Dawit Dereje

Name: Dawit Dereje

Education: Diploma in wood work

Company name: Easek Decor and Event Organizer

Title: Owner and General Manager

Founded in: 2020

What it do: St. George Church, Piassa

Hq: Decor service and managing events

Number of Employees: 36

Startup capital: Two million birr

Current Capital: Growing

Reason for starting the Business: To change myself financially

Biggest perk of ownership: Happiness and serving others

Biggest strength: Punctuality

Biggest challenge: Inflation

Plan: To make artificial flowers

First career: Wood Worker

Most interested in meeting: Ambassador Fitsum Arega

Most admired person: Dj Dani Comoros, founder of Deva Decor

Stress reducer: Reading books

Favorite past time: Working and reading

Favorite book: Eyarico 666 or 777 Abiy Yilma

Favorite destination: Hawassa

Favorite automobile: Hyundai, Tucson

Waste Not, Want Not!

Over a decade ago, in their report “Global Food Waste Not, Want Not”, the Institution of Mechanical Engineers stated that we produce about four billion metric tonnes of food per annum. Yet due to poor practices in harvesting, storage, and transportation, as well as market and consumer wastage, it is estimated that 30–50% (or 1.2–2 billion tonnes) of all food produced never reaches a human stomach. Furthermore, this figure does not reflect the fact that large amounts of land, energy, fertilisers, and water have also been lost in the production of foodstuffs which simply end up as waste. This level of wastage is a tragedy that cannot continue if we are to succeed in the challenge of sustainably meeting our future food demands.
The Institution identified three principal emerging population groups across the world, based on characteristics associated with their current and projected stage of economic development:
Fully developed, mature, post-industrial societies, such as those in Europe, characterised by stable or declining populations which are increasing in age.
Late-stage developing nations that are currently industrialising rapidly, for example China, which will experience decelerating rates of population growth, coupled with increasing affluence and age profile.
Newly developing countries that are beginning to industrialise, primarily in Africa, with high to very high population growth rates (typically doubling or tripling their populations by 2050) and characterised by a predominantly young age profile.
Each group over the coming decades will need to address different issues surrounding food production, storage, and transportation, as well as consumer expectations, if we are to continue to feed all our people.
In less-developed countries, such as those of sub-Saharan Africa and South-East Asia, wastage tends to occur primarily at the farmer-producer end of the supply chain. Inefficient harvesting, inadequate local transportation and poor infrastructure mean that produce is frequently handled inappropriately and stored under unsuitable farm site conditions. This is true for Ethiopia as well.
In mature, fully developed countries, more-efficient farming practices and better transport, storage and processing facilities ensure that a larger proportion of the food produced reaches markets and consumers. However, characteristics associated with modern consumer culture mean produce is often wasted through retail and customer behaviour.
Major supermarkets, in meeting consumer expectations, will often reject entire crops of perfectly edible fruit and vegetables at the farm because they do not meet exacting marketing standards for their physical characteristics, such as size and appearance. For example, up to 30% of the UK’s vegetable crop is never harvested as a result of such practices. Globally, retailers generate 1.6 million tonnes of food waste annually in this way.
Of the produce that does appear in the supermarket, commonly used sales promotions frequently encourage customers to purchase excessive quantities which, in the case of perishable foodstuffs, inevitably generate wastage in the home. Overall, between 30% and 50% of what has been bought in developed countries is thrown away by the purchaser.
Wasting food means losing not only life-supporting nutrition but also precious resources, including land, water, and energy. As a global society therefore, tackling food waste will help contribute towards addressing a number of key resource issues:
Over the last five decades, improved farming techniques and technologies have helped to significantly increase crop yields along with a 12% expansion of farmed land use. However, with global food production already utilising about 4.9Gha of the 10Gha usable land surface available, a further increase in farming area without impacting unfavourably on what remains of the world’s natural ecosystems appears unlikely. The challenge is that an increase in animal-based production will require greater land and resource requirement, as livestock farming demands extensive land use. One hectare of land can, for example, produce rice or potatoes for 19–22 people per annum. The same area will produce enough lamb or beef for only one or two people. Considerable tensions are likely to emerge, as the need for food competes with demands for ecosystem preservation and biomass production as a renewable energy source.
Over the past century, freshwater abstraction for human use has increased at more than double the rate of population growth. Currently about 3.8 trillion m3 of water is used by humans per annum. About 70% of this is consumed by the global agriculture sector, and the level of use will continue to rise over the coming decades. Indeed, depending on how food is produced and the validity of forecasts for demographic trends, the demand for water in food production could reach 10–13 trillion m3 annually by mid-century. This is 2.5 to 3.5 times greater than the total human use of fresh water today.
Better irrigation can dramatically improve crop yield and about 40% of the world’s food supply is currently derived from irrigated land. However, water used in irrigation is often sourced unsustainably, through boreholes sunk into poorly managed aquifers. In some cases, government development programmes and international aid interventions exacerbate this problem. In addition, we continue to use wasteful systems, such as flood or overhead spray, which are difficult to control and lose much of the water to evaporation. Although the drip or trickle irrigation methods are more expensive to install, they can be as much as 33% more efficient in water use as well as being able to carry fertilisers directly to the root.
In processing of foods after the agricultural stage, there are large additional uses of water that need to be tackled in a world of growing demand. This is particularly crucial in the case of meat production, where beef uses about 50 times more water than vegetables. In the future, more- effective washing techniques, management procedures, and recycling and purification of water will be needed to reduce wastage.
Energy is an essential resource across the entire food production cycle, with estimates showing an average of 7–10 calories of input being required in the production of one calorie of food. This varies dramatically depending on crop, from three calories for plant crops to 35 calories in the production of beef. Since much of this energy comes from the utilisation of fossil fuels, wastage of food potentially contributes to unnecessary global warming as well as inefficient resource utilisation.
In the modern industrialised agricultural process – which developing nations are moving towards in order to increase future yields – energy usage in the making and application of agrochemicals such as fertilisers and pesticides represents the single biggest component. Wheat production takes 50% of its energy input for these two items alone. Indeed, on a global scale, fertiliser manufacturing consumes about 3–5% of the world’s annual natural gas supply. With production anticipated to increase by 25% between now and 2030, sustainable energy sourcing will become an increasingly major issue. Energy to power machinery, both on the farm and in the storage and processing facilities, together with the direct use of fuel in field mechanisation and produce transportation, adds to the energy total, which currently represents about 3.1% of annual global energy consumption.
Recommendations
Rising population combined with improved nutrition standards and shifting dietary preferences will exert pressure for increases in global food supply. Engineers, scientists and agriculturalists have the knowledge, tools and systems that will assist in achieving productivity increases. However, pressure will grow on finite resources of land, energy, and water. The potential to provide 60–100% more food by simply eliminating losses, while simultaneously freeing up land, energy, and water resources for other uses, is an opportunity that should not be ignored. To begin tackling the challenge, the Institution recommends that:
Programmes to be put in place that transfer engineering knowledge, design know-how, and suitable technology to newly developing countries. This will help improve produce handling in the harvest, and immediate post-harvest stages of food production.
Governments of rapidly developing countries incorporate waste minimisation thinking into the transport infrastructure and storage facilities currently being planned, engineered and built.
Governments in developed nations devise and implement policy that changes consumer expectations. These should discourage retailers from wasteful practices that lead to the rejection of food on the basis of cosmetic characteristics, and losses in the home due to excessive purchasing by consumers.”

Reference: “Global Food – Waste Not, Want Not” by the Institution of Mechanical Engineers.
Ton Haverkort

The West sets a disturbing new precedent over murdered Russian military blogger

0

The lack of condemnation of the St. Petersburg blast hints that sometimes terrorism is considered acceptable

Apparently terrorism and murdering reporters get a free pass if the Western establishment doesn’t like the target’s profile or if the perpetrator risks being linked to an ally.
The radio silence from the West is deafening in the wake of the murder of military blogger Vladlen Tatarsky at a cafe in St. Petersburg. Tatarsky was killed after being handed a statue by a young woman, Darya Trepova, that subsequently blew up the entire venue.
For all of the Western officials’ differences with Russia, can they really not at least bring themselves to condemn a blatant act of terrorism in the middle of a major city center? We’re talking here about the same folks who spent two decades kicking down doors around the world under the guise of fighting a “Global War on Terrorism.”
Just a few years ago, cartoonists and writers for the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo were gunned down in broad daylight at their Paris office by jihadists who objected to the publication’s portrayal of Islam and the Prophet Mohammed. Western leaders roundly condemned that terrorist act, standing firmly on the principle that you couldn’t just go around murdering people who conveyed thoughts and views that you didn’t like. Many of these leaders even traveled to Paris to march alongside a massive crowd in defense of freedom of expression and the press.
Now, however, they can’t even bother to muster the most meager defense of the same principles in the wake of Tatarsky’s murder in an attack that investigators claim is linked to Ukraine.
It seems that whenever there’s any alleged involvement of Ukraine, the West conveniently turns a blind eye. The automobile explosion that killed Russian journalist and activist, Darya Dugina, near Moscow comes to mind. “American officials said they were not aware of the plan ahead of time for the attack that killed Daria Dugina and that they had admonished Ukraine over it,” reported the New York Times last October. Similarly, the Washington Post reported this week that the “unwritten rule” among Western officials is “don’t talk about Nord Stream” the pipeline network carrying gas from Russia to Europe that was mysteriously blown up last year since they “would rather not have to deal with the possibility that Ukraine or its allies were involved.”
Then there is the “Mirotvorets” list of journalists and activists maintained by Kiev-based NGO, the Mirotvorets Center, which names people “whose actions have signs of crimes against the national security of Ukraine, peace, human security, and the international law.” It has yet to either be shut down by the Ukrainian government or denounced by Western allies, despite a 2017 United Nations report on human rights in Ukraine urging Ukrainian authorities to address it.
Acts of terrorism and affronts to free speech are clearly in the eye of the Western beholder, which would explain why much of the media rhetoric focuses on Tatarsky’s pro-Russia stance. The void left by the lack of official reaction from Western officials is being filled with Western press articles focusing on the Ukrainian-born blogger’s prior involvement with Russian-backed separatist forces in 2014 in the Donbass. There, he got his start in covering events through his Telegram channel, which grew to become wildly popular, with CNN noting his “ardent pro-war commentary.” But if prior military experience of some kind, and taking sides in one’s coverage of armed conflict, was justification for murdering journalists, then every Western veteran who started a blog, and every opinion journalist, would be fair game.
There was no shortage of Western outrage over the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi inside the Saudi embassy in Istanbul a few years ago, despite his longstanding activism against the Saudi leadership. Why should the death of this Russian blogger be treated any differently?
Bulgarian investigative journalist, Cristo Grozev, who was heavily featured in the Academy Award-winning feature documentary film about Russian opposition figure Alexey Navalny, apparently thinks that some people are just “legitimate targets” for terrorism, and argues that the cafe may not have been a “purely civilian location.” Although it was previously owned by Yevgeny Prigozhin, the head of Russian private military enterprise, Wagner Group, that doesn’t magically transform a dining establishment, which welcomes anyone right off the street in the middle of a major city, into some kind of a military base. If an American general walks into the Ritz-Carlton hotel in Pentagon City, Virginia, it doesn’t suddenly turn the hotel or its bar into a legitimate military target for bombing by some entity that has a score to settle with Washington.
And what about every journalist who has been embedded as the guest of Western troops in conflicts like Iraq and Afghanistan and has promoted the talking points of their hosts while siding with their own country? Are they fair game for picking off now, too?
The prominent Washington Institute for the Study of War think tank, whose board members include American generals Jack Keane and David Petraeus, as well as Washington’s former ambassador to the UN, Kelly Craft, previously and routinely qualified Tatarsky as a prominent Russian military blogger whose work they apparently considered worthy of informing their research.
It seems like there’s an effort underway by some members of the Western establishment to reframe this egregious act of terrorism and murder as something trivial, all because the target was a Russian whose views they don’t like and that’s an awfully slippery slope.

Rachel Marsden is a columnist, political strategist, and host of independently produced talk-shows in French and English.

Italy’s Non-Cancel Culture

On the periphery of Rome, not far from the Vatican, stands a towering obelisk named for Benito Mussolini, Italy’s fascist dictator and ally of Adolf Hitler. On a recent visit to the city, my taxi driver knew exactly where it was and found nothing remarkable about a request to go there.
The Mussolini Obelisk, standing watch over the Foro Italico sports complex, served as the starting point for my atypical tour of the Eternal City’s “fascist architecture.” At the very outset, our tour group asked our guide: Why has the Mussolini Obelisk not been removed from what appears to be a place of honor?
For an American visitor, it was the obvious question. We have become accustomed to the removal of the likenesses of Confederate generals and even Christopher Columbus from public places. But it was not a difficult question for our guide to answer: “In Italy, we view it as history.” Efforts to remove it had fizzled.
The loss that comes from laundering the past was made clear to us in the historical lesson our tour group received that day a lesson that would have been impossible if cancel culture, American-style, had prevailed. Over more than four hours, the reminders and remainders of “Il Duce” served as a point of entry to a history that underscored why we view Mussolini as an historic villain. At the same time, they provided a series of clues to help answer the question that prompted me to book the tour in the first place: How was it that the country of the Renaissance, of great art and great literature, had veered so far off course as to help enable the Holocaust?
Bruno, our guide, took great pains to make it clear that he was there neither to denounce nor to celebrate Italian fascism. His fascination was with the ways in which Mussolini had transformed the face of Rome. That brought us to the “rationalist”-style modernism of Mussolini-era government buildings, private office complexes, and sports facilities all still in use and all more engaging than their brutalist successors. These buildings served as a prompt for an explanation of the popularity of a dictator in his time and his lasting impact. Bruno admitted that submerged nostalgia still exists for Mussolini in Italy, but the same structures that explain his rise also help explain his fall and infamy.
The man often referred to as the one who “made the trains run on time” was, we learned, a builder on a grand scale so grand that he dared to think of himself as an emperor and heir to Caesar. Indeed, he built what he understood to be his own version of a Roman Forum a stunning white-marble, campus-style complex of offices meant originally for the 1942 World’s Fair (which never happened). In Italian, this area of the city is known as the EUR the Exposizione Universale di Roma. It is the site of the building known colloquially as the Colosseo Quadrato, or “square Colosseum” for its levels of arches reminiscent of that ancient structure. It’s a masterpiece of white marble modernism that today serves as the headquarters of the Fendi fashion brand. It was designed by architects Giovanni Guerrini, Ernesto Bruno La Padula, and Mario Romano, and built between 1938 and 1943. Those who can read the clues can spot the hubris here: its six arches across and nine down stand for the number of letters in Il Duce’s name, Benito Mussolini.
Just as striking is the Stadio dei Marmi (“Stadium of the Marbles”) in the Foro Italico a track surrounded by a circle of faux-Roman statues, each embodying a different sport, such as javelin or discus. Not coincidentally, at the same site stood a statue of a young, athletic Italian, the image of youth and strength that Mussolini had offered to an Italy that had stumbled not long after its 1876 unification. It was chilling to see the statue standing there, still giving the infamous fascist salute, though that gesture now seemed cautionary rather than celebratory at least for our group.
Also surprising (for its remaining extant) is a series of inscribed marble slabs, each telling the story of one of Mussolini’s triumphs, mainly from the 1920s. One commemorated the Lateran Treaty, the historic “reconciliation” with Pope Pius XI in 1929, which enabled Vatican City to remain a sovereign state. To commemorate the treaty, Mussolini, acting as a city builder, cleared many blocks of tenements to make way for the Via della Conciliazione, the road that today offers direct views of St. Peter’s Basilica and serving as a reminder that urban planning often has a decidedly authoritarian dimension.
Another marble slab commemorates the construction of a canal in southern Italy that helped irrigate wheat fields. It depicts a bare-chested, Putin-like Mussolini posing as a farmer. Another recognizes the government-led consolidation of the country’s steel industry, and yet another celebrates the brutal Italian invasion and occupation of Ethiopia, exemplifying the empire-building impulse that helped drive Mussolini into his disastrous alliance with Hitler’s Germany.
Each of the dozens of these inscribed stones stands as a symbol of the regime of an infamous dictator, who would ultimately be forced from power by his own fascist colleagues, later to be shot and hung by his ankles in the public square in Milan by partisans.
The statues, the buildings, the obelisk, and more even the Fascist Party’s symbol of intertwined “fasces,” harkening back to Rome (and, noted Bruno, to be found throughout Washington, D.C.) all still stand as points of entry to a complicated past. On that score, it’s worth noting that, throughout the 1920s, the Italian fascists were popular, even feted in the U.S., for their anti-Communism. A statue to one of Mussolini’s colleagues, the aviator Italo Balbo, still stands in Chicago. It was a gift of Mussolini himself, fashioned from a 2,000-year-old Roman column.
Ultimately, however, there was no physical representation of the historic tragedy of Mussolini in our tour: his alliance with Germany beginning in 1930, and his decision, allegedly under pressure from Hitler, to enact the “racial laws” of 1936, which would lead to the deportation of many of the Jews of Rome, Florence, and Turin (home to Primo Levi) to the gas chambers of Auschwitz. Jews had lived continuously in Rome since before the time of Christ.
The Ethiopia-related marble slab provides an indirect explanation of Mussolini’s evil actions. In the wake of World War I, Italy then on the side of the Allies had hoped to be awarded territories on its northern borders, just as France and England had gained colonies in the Middle East. Empire envy, one might say, helped drive into Hitler’s arms a nation that had “emancipated” its Jews upon its 1876 unification and had sprung open the Jewish ghettoes of Venice.
It’s a history about which our fascist architecture tour provided hints. But clues to the past speak only to those who notice them. Perhaps that points to the best compromise regarding public iconography of a troubling past: let the statues and monuments stand, with explanations, for those who would learn from them.

Howard Husock is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise institute and the author of The Poor Side of Town: And Why We Need It