Measures to reduce plastic pollution in our oceans

How can we reduce the amount of plastic that ends up in our oceans every year? There are measures that depend on governments, but there are also everyday actions that can reduce our impact on the environment.

As 11Onze agent Mònica Cornudella alerts, many fish drown every year because they mistake a plastic bag for a jellyfish and try to eat it, or because they get trapped in the plastic rings that hold soft drink cans.

The dumping of plastics in the seas and oceans is a problem that will last because they are products that take a long time to degrade. For example, a plastic bag takes between 20 and 50 years, but, as Cornudella says, the dreaded plastic bottles “take about 500 years” and a tyre that has ended up in the sea can take “up to 1,000 years”.

It is estimated that by 2050 “there will be more plastics than fish in our seas and oceans” because every year “between 8 and 15 million tonnes of plastic waste is dumped into the sea“, as the 11Onze agent explains. In economic terms, the dumping of plastics in the sea generates damage to marine ecosystems worth 11,800 million euros, according to the United Nations environmental programme.

Measures to stop the ecological disaster

In view of this situation, Mònica Cornudella proposes institutional action in three main generic areas to stop, or at least reduce, the magnitude of the problem.

The first measure would be to promote “environmental education” to train the youngest children in their commitment to the environment, given that “the habits acquired from an early age will always last into adulthood”. And in this sense, Cornudella proposes “increasing the sustainability of schools”.

Another area is the promotion of “volunteering” to collaborate with initiatives that are being carried out everywhere to protect the environment. For example, Cornudella cites the cleaning of beaches, forests, and public places, which are sometimes very degraded.

The third issue raised by the 11Onze agent is that of the legal framework. “We need to take a step back and go back to using glass bottles, cardboard boxes, and wood. Faced with a very powerful lobby of packaging and plastics manufacturers, “we need to have laws that prohibit and regulate the excessive and unmeasured use of plastic”.

The importance of everyday actions

Beyond these generic issues, “small daily actions” can also help to take care of our oceans. Along these lines, Cornudella recommends “practising the three R’s, on which the circular economy is based: reduce, reuse and recycle”. In addition to reducing the plastics we generate, this will allow us to “reduce our carbon footprint and at the same time combat climate change”. And, in the age of cyberactivism, Mònica Cornudella insists on “sharing initiatives on social networks”.

“Implementing the circular economy and protecting marine flora and fauna in the face of climate change” should be, according to the 11Onze agent, a common goal for humanity. “Every action, no matter how small, helps us to achieve a healthier planet and to protect the seas and oceans“, concludes Cornudella.

If you want to discover how to drink the best water, save money and help the planet, go to 11Onze Essentials.

How does livestock management affect the environment? Two livestock associations in Segrià (Lleida) have turned the problem of slurry into a solution. They have created a pioneering composting plant in the country. We talk about it in a new episode of People, with Miquel Serra, one of the promoters of the project.

With no more than 10,000 inhabitants, Alcarràs is the municipality in Europe with the highest density of farms per square kilometre. In total, it has 45,000 steers, 35,000 pig mothers, and some 250,000 fattening cattle. That is why, for the neighbours, the management of the nitrogen produced by the slurry was of the utmost importance to comply with European environmental standards. This is how the composting plant project was born, promoted by the two large livestock organisations in the municipality, to convert the slurry into fertiliser.

And they did it collectively, as Serra recalls. The project cost them 1.5 million euros. “Cattle manure is better managed. And on pig farms, where we have solid and liquid manure separators, we were interested in being able to manage solid manure. The composting plant had to allow us to manage both manures separately, because cattle manure is classified as organic production, and pig manure is not, although it can be used for conventional agriculture,” explains Serra, who is a member of the driving force behind Alcarràs Bioproductors.

An exceptional case

And why aren’t there more composting plants like the one in Alcarràs all over the country? “Until now, all composting plants have been set up by people who wanted to do business. And one way was to manage other by-products that are difficult to treat and for which the businesses paid the composting plants. This is what made them viable”, explains Serra.

On the other hand, in Alcarràs they wanted a manure and slurry composting, without looking for profitability first, but rather the environmental benefit and the continuity of their farms, and this makes it a unique case in Spain. “We have to think that our business is to produce meat”, argues the promoter, who explains that, nevertheless, there are already three multinationals that have shown interest in buying the compost they will produce. “In the end, we are convinced that we will manage to make it viable”, he acknowledges.

As for financing, they have not yet considered European funds, because the initiative was born before, but Serra explains that they feel very supported by the Department of Agriculture and the Diputació de Lleida. “Through the BioHub Km 0 project, designed to reactivate the economy of the area, we have been able to manage a small grant that allows us to be more ambitious,” explains Serra. In fact, the composting plant is just the first step towards a larger circular and sustainable economy project. The idea is to generate an alternative that allows us to conserve and value the talent of the territory. Turning slurry into compost may be the ultimate sustainable solution, but more uses are still being investigated. For example, cellulose can be extracted from manure and used to make fabrics. Perhaps the future of sustainable fashion will be to wear clothes made out of manure.

11Onze is the fintech community of Catalonia. Open an account by downloading the super app El Canut on Android and Apple and join the revolution!

After discussing narrative and energy sovereignty, an uncomfortable —and perhaps inevitable— question emerges: what happens when we imagine a decentralized future within a system that, by nature, tends to concentrate power? This tension is not new. In fact, it runs throughout modern economic history: the struggle between the technical capacity to distribute and the systemic need to centralize.

Solar Punk is not just a visual trend or a pleasant aesthetic. It is, in essence, a silent but profound challenge to extractive capitalism. Not because it directly rejects it, but because it questions its guiding principle: that value must flow toward the center in order to be efficient.

At first glance, Solar Punk presents itself as an optimistic reaction to the saturation of dystopian narratives: plants on façades, solar energy on rooftops, self-sufficient communities, and technology integrated with nature. But this seemingly innocent imagery hides a far-reaching economic proposal: distributed production, resilient communities, reduced dependencies, and a rebalancing of power. And it is precisely here that its strength —and its discomfort— lies.

Because contemporary capitalism is not the result of chance, but of a very specific historical evolution. As we have already analyzed in La Plaça, the system has moved from conquering territories to structuring dependencies. After the Second World War, the global economic center shifted to the United States, not only due to its productive capacity, but because of its financial architecture and the institutionalization of the dollar as a global axis. It was not just about producing more, but about defining the rules of the game.

This model is based on an extractive dynamic that has been refined over time. We are no longer talking only about natural resources, but about the extraction of financial rents, data, and value through debt. It is a system that concentrates wealth and power in central nodes, consolidating dependencies that often go unnoticed because they have become normalized. And it is precisely this normality that Solar Punk calls into question.

A new economy… or the limit of the system?

It is not just an environmental issue. It is structural. The global productive model is designed so that wealth flows toward centers of decision, and this dynamic is not accidental: it is the condition of its stability. Concentration is not a dysfunction of the system; it is its internal logic.

The data confirms it: according to the World Inequality Report, the richest 1% accumulates a growing share of global wealth, while strategic sectors —energy, technology, and finance— are consolidated in the hands of a few actors. As already analyzed in The scourge of crony capitalism, the proximity between political power and large corporations is not an anomaly, but a form of governance. When resources are concentrated, decision-making capacity is concentrated as well.

In this context, Solar Punk often appears as a misunderstood proposal. It does not speak of collapse, but of regeneration; not of scarcity, but of distributed efficiency; not of individualism, but of community. But this reading, if it remains superficial, misses the most important aspect: its transformative potential.

In economic terms, Solar Punk implies micro energy production, circular economy, local infrastructures, open technology, and the reduction of intermediaries. But above all, it implies something deeper: a redistribution of value flows. And that is what makes it difficult to assimilate within the current system.

When a community produces its own energy, it not only reduces costs: it alters the direction of income. When it finances local projects, it not only stimulates the economy: it redefines the relationship between capital and territory. When it embraces distributed production, it not only gains autonomy: it weakens structural dependencies. In fact, in Europe, local energy communities are growing driven by the regulatory framework of the European Union. It is not a declared revolution, but a gradual correction.

This approach conflicts with the foundations of the current system. Extractive capitalism requires energy, financial, and technological dependence to sustain itself. Solar Punk questions these three pillars simultaneously. And it does so without noise: it does not propose replacing the system, but reducing its capacity to absorb.

Therefore, the real debate is not aesthetic, but structural. The current model shows evident cracks —energy vulnerability, chronic debt, geopolitical tensions, and fragile supply chains— which are not anomalies, but consequences of an architecture designed to concentrate.

Solar Punk does not propose an immediate rupture, but an adaptation that, if successful, may end up transforming the system from within. Therefore, it is not a frontal revolution, but rather a deviation of course, without barricades and through everyday decisions that, accumulated, alter the structure.

Toward a more resilient and distributed economy

At 11Onze, we believe that understanding the system is the first step to avoid depending on it uncritically. Economic history teaches us that no model is immutable, but also that no transformation is spontaneous. There is always a prior tension, a consciousness that matures slowly before becoming visible.

In an increasingly volatile environment, energy and financial decentralization is not a trend, but a rational response to the vulnerabilities of an overly concentrated model. But this response is not only technical. It is, above all, cultural and moral.

The future will not be only a matter of technology, but of how we choose to organize power, resources, and dependencies. And this decision is not made in abstraction: it is built through every collective choice and every structure we accept or question.

Therefore, the fundamental question is not whether Solar Punk will succeed as an aesthetic, but whether we will be capable of assuming the cost —and the responsibility— of redistributing economic power before the tensions of the system intensify. Because history does not change when new ideas appear; it changes when those ideas become structure. And the future, as always, is not what we imagine, but what we choose to sustain.

11Onze is the community fintech of Catalonia. Open an account by downloading the app El Canut for Android or iOS and join the revolution!

Climate change is the biggest challenge facing humanity and halting global warming is essential to ensure our survival. The transition to cleaner and renewable energy sources is a key factor in achieving this. But to what extent is it feasible?

The World Economic Forum’s latest Global Risks Report 2024 finds that extreme weather events, biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and natural resource scarcity pose the greatest risk to humanity over the next decade.

The main cause is the burning of fossil fuels, which has increased as the human population has grown. Their combustion generates greenhouse gases that trap the sun’s rays in the earth’s atmosphere, raising the average surface temperature of the planet.

No time to stop global warming

Greenhouse gas emissions reached record highs in the past decade. Although their rate of growth has slowed, the report “Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change” warns that limiting global warming to 1.5 °C will only be possible if there is an immediate and deep reduction in emissions.

To achieve this, emissions would have to be cut by almost half by 2030 and be zero by mid-century. At the COP28 summit in Dubai last December, it was agreed to triple the use of renewable energy in the next five years.

Yet, the world still consumes over 35 billion barrels of oil yearly. This dependence on fossil fuels is unsustainable, both from a production and environmental point of view. Experts estimate that 40% of the world’s oil reserves have already been exhausted and that, at the current rate, there are only about 50 years left.

Can the world run on renewable energy alone?

Renewable energy is any type of energy that comes from a source that does not run out over time. There are many renewable energy sources, such as solar, wind or geothermal energy, and they are important because, unlike hydrocarbons, they are infinite and produce almost no polluting emissions.

The main problem with renewable energies is the instability of their production and storage so that they can be easily distributed. In other words, they are limited in terms of their availability and location, which makes them unprofitable. However, the cost could be reduced by developing more advanced technologies to capture energy and transport it more efficiently.

In this context, a study by IRENA, the International Renewable Energy Agency, shows that a 100% renewable energy model is possible and points the way towards a 45% reduction in carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions from 2010 levels by 2030, and net-zero emissions by 2050.

IRENA’s analysis concludes that we already have the technologies that can lead us to a decarbonised energy system, with solutions that can be deployed rapidly and at scale. The study shows that more than 90% of the solutions that make the 2050 goal possible involve renewables through direct supply, electrification, energy efficiency, green hydrogen and bioenergy combined with carbon capture and storage.

The Agency argues that the increase in electricity prices on the wholesale market has been caused by the high price of gas from which electricity is produced because, right now, renewables do not provide the stability needed to guarantee electricity supply. Therefore, the sooner we achieve a decarbonised economy, the sooner we will leave behind this dependence and the extreme price variations associated with it.

11Onze is the community fintech of Catalonia. Open an account by downloading the app El Canut for Android or iOS and join the revolution!

In addition to gold’s usefulness in the financial, ornamental and technological fields, it can also contribute to the sustainability of the planet. Research has found that a nanoparticle catalyst of this precious metal can convert waste materials, such as biomass and polyester, into useful organic silicon compounds. 

Plastic waste is a problem for humanity. That is why many resources are being invested in the search for ways to recycle them and give them a new useful life. Several lines of research aim to convert these waste materials into useful compounds and products in an efficient way.

One of them, involving scientists at Tokyo Metropolitan University, has found that gold nanoparticles supported on a zirconium oxide support can convert waste materials, such as biomass and polyester, into organosilane compounds, which are valuable chemicals with a wide range of applications. The results of their study were recently published in the prestigious Journal of the American Chemical Society.

The new protocol takes advantage of the combination of gold nanoparticles with a zirconium oxide support, whose characteristics allow it to react both as a base and as an acid. This makes it possible to recycle the waste under less demanding conditions and in a more environmentally friendly way than with the systems investigated so far.

New life for plastic waste

The research team has been working for some time on converting plastic and biomass into organosilanes, which are organic molecules with a silicon atom attached to carbon used in high-quality coatings and in the production of pharmaceuticals and agrochemicals. 

The problem until now was that the addition of the silicon atom involved the use of air- and moisture-sensitive reagents that require high temperatures and extremely acidic or basic conditions. As a result, the conversion process was not at all environmentally efficient.

A key step

The big finding is that the new gold nanoparticle catalyst causes ether and ester groups, both of which are abundant in plastics such as polyester and biomass compounds such as cellulose, to react with the disilane to form useful organosilanes. All that is needed is gentle heating in solution. 

The researchers have identified that the key to the effectiveness of this conversion lies in the combination of the gold nanoparticles and the amphoteric nature of the zirconium oxide support, i.e. its ability to act interchangeably as a base and an acid.

Double advantage

Not only does this system allow polyesters to be decomposed under much less demanding conditions than those used so far. More importantly, the reaction products are valuable compounds ready for use. 

The research team hopes that this new way of producing organosilanes will lead to a carbon-neutral future by allowing plastic waste to be recycled efficiently and preventing thousands of tonnes of plastic waste from burning in incineration plants.

If you want to discover the best option to protect your savings, enter Preciosos 11Onze. We will help you buy at the best price the safe-haven asset par excellence: physical gold.

Plogui, nevi o faci sol, el subministrament de l’aigua que consumeixen més del 80% dels catalans segueix en mans d’empreses totalment o parcialment privades. Malgrat els esforços per recuperar la gestió pública d’aquest servei, les multinacionals del sector es resisteixen a perdre un negoci milionari.

A través de l’empresa pública ONAIGUA, el consell comarcal d’Osona va assumir l’abril de l’any passat la gestió del subministrament d’aigua en aquesta comarca, pel que dona servei a 11.400 punts de consum i arriba a més de 25.000 habitants. Es va convertir en el primer consell comarcal a prendre una mesura d’aquest calat.

Podríem dir que es tracta d’una anomalia del mercat, ja que el subministrament de l’aigua a Catalunya està majoritàriament en mans privades. Un reduït nombre d’empreses privades administren i es lucren d’aquest bé preuat al nostre país gràcies a concessions moltes vegades qüestionades. I això que en el món la gestió pública assorteix al 90% de la població i Nacions Unides reconeix l’aigua com un dret humà.

Segons les dades de la plataforma Aigua és vida, més del 80% dels catalans obtenen l’aigua a través d’un servei totalment o parcialment privatitzat, mentre que el que el servei públic no arriba ni al 20% de la població. Aquest desequilibri s’explica pel domini del model privat en els municipis amb un major volum de població, que són els més rendibles.

Pressió per a municipalitzar un servei bàsic

Davant aquesta realitat, existeix una creixent pressió per recuperar la gestió pública d’aquest servei. L’Associació de Municipis i Entitats per l’Aigua Pública (AMAP) ja compta amb 68 membres i representa al 47% de la població de Catalunya. Recentment, publicava un informe amb propostes de reformes legislatives per canviar aquesta situació.

Sis municipis, l’Associació de micropobles de Catalunya i una nova empresa pública es van sumar a aquesta entitat l’any 2022. Dels nous municipis, només Mieres (la Garrotxa), Collbató (Baix Llobregat) i Torroella de Montgrí (Baix Empordà) gestionen directament l’aigua. Castelló d’Empúries està en procés de municipalitzar el servei, mentre que Manlleu i Sitges encara estan lligades a concessions per més d’una dècada amb Sorea i Agbar. Quant a l’Associació de micropobles de Catalunya, cal tenir en compte que el 70% dels municipis de menys de mil habitants, que són els menys rendibles, ja gestionen directament el subministrament d’aigua.

Gairebé un monopoli

Tot i que les empreses privades que gestionen l’aigua a Catalunya es presenten amb diferents noms segons el municipi, la majoria pertanyen al grup Agbar, que està valorat en uns 3.000 milions d’euros.

Aquest grup controla totalment l’empresa Sorea i posseeix gairebé el 80% de la Companyia d’Aigües de Sabadell (CASSA), el 68% d’Aigües de Rigat (Igualada) i el 49% de l’Empresa Municipal Aigües de Tarragona (Ematsa). A més, té al voltant del 35% de Mina Pública de Terrassa i el 31% de Girona SA.

Els seus beneficis no sols provenen de la venda d’aigua, que l’any passat pretenia encarir un 7,4% a Barcelona. També de la subcontractació de serveis a les seves filials. Això permet que a la Ciutat Comtal, per exemple, el cost dels comptadors d’aigua per a l’usuari final acabi més que triplicant el cost original. Això suposa uns 17 milions d’euros de benefici addicional a l’any.

Estratègia de judicialització

Davant un negoci d’aquesta grandària no resulta estrany que Agbar porti als tribunals qualsevol iniciativa encaminada a recuperar la gestió pública del subministrament d’aigua, com detalla el portal ctxt. Només a Barcelona, aquesta multinacional i les seves entitats afins han presentat una quarantena d’accions judicials.

La seva estratègia d’empantanar judicialment aquests processos per dilatar-los o diluir-los ha fet que fins i tot posés un contenciós contra un simple conveni entre l’Ajuntament de Barcelona i l’Àrea Metropolitana per a l’intercanvi d’informació entre institucions.

Un dels casos més sonats té a veure amb la consulta que l’Ajuntament de Barcelona volia impulsar per conèixer l’opinió de la ciutadania sobre una eventual gestió pública de l’aigua. Diverses entitats, entre les quals es troba Agbar, van interposar recursos. Finalment, el Tribunal Superior de Justícia de Catalunya (TSJC) va suspendre el reglament de participació ciutadana en la part relativa a les consultes i va impedir que la iniciativa tirés endavant.

El cas que afecta un major nombre de municipis és el que Agbar va impulsar contra diversos consistoris de l’Àrea Metropolitana de Barcelona. Inicialment, una sentència del TSJC en 2016 va anul·lar la concessió a Aigües de Barcelona del subministrament d’aigua en diversos municipis del cinturó metropolità, amb la qual l’empresa s’assegurava el servei a gairebé tres milions d’habitants durant 35 anys i uns ingressos de 3.500 milions d’euros. El tribunal veia “motius d’anul·lació per vicis en el procés de contractació” quan es va constituir l’empresa mixta en la qual participava Agbar. Tot i això, el Tribunal Suprem va revocar aquesta sentència l’any 2019 en considerar que el procediment emprat per l’Administració per adjudicar el servei sense concurs públic estava avalat per la Llei de contractes del sector públic.

Pràctiques tèrboles

Com denunciava Eloi Badia, regidor d’Emergència Climàtica i Transició Ecològica de l’Ajuntament de Barcelona, les tèrboles pràctiques d’Agbar per aconseguir concessions l’han dut a ser imputat en tres macrocauses judicials (Pokémon, Púnica i Petrum), a més de ser expulsat en 2017 de la gestió de l’aigua a Girona després de demostrar-se la seva vinculació amb la trama del 3%.

Els informes d’aquesta última causa constataven que, durant més de dues dècades, els gironins van pagar més d’1 milió d’euros de sobrecost pel servei d’aigua. A més, l’Agència Tributària advertia que els directius de l’empresa havien carregat despeses personals a la societat i va concloure que Girona SA havia cobrat centenars de milers d’euros per serveis no prestats.

Com expliquem en l’article “Els serveis públics, cada vegada més privatitzats”, la privatització de serveis essencials avança de manera implacable a Europa des dels anys vuitanta. I això està tenint un preu inqüestionable per al conjunt de la ciutadania. L’agent d’11Onze Jordi Coll apunta que aquest procés ha suposat sotmetre la prestació d’aquests serveis “a la lògica de criteris de mercat i, per tant, dels beneficis privats”.

Si vols descobrir com beure la millor aigua, estalviar diners i ajudar al planeta, entra a Imprescindibles 11Onze.

There is an uncomfortable question that Catalonia and Europe have avoided for far too long: what happens when a country still has money but no longer controls what it eats? The answer is simple and brutal. Sovereignty becomes an illusion. That is why, when at 11Onze we argue that one must think like the governor of one’s own central bank, we are not talking only about gold. We are also talking about food. About what cannot be printed. About what sustains life when global supply chains fail, prices surge, or politics turns its back on the territory.

For years, the primary sector has been treated as a romantic relic. As if farmers were a memory of the past rather than a critical infrastructure of the present. But reality has become stubborn. Food inflation, drought, external dependence, the aging of the countryside and agricultural protests across Europe have reminded us of a basic truth: without farmers there is no food security, and without food security there is no economic or political stability.

Catalonia is experiencing this firsthand. According to Idescat, the number of agricultural holdings fell from 54,972 in 2020 to 48,725 in 2023. It is a very rapid decline in a very short time. At the same time, the utilized agricultural area has also decreased. We are not speaking merely of a statistical change. We are speaking of productive capacity disappearing, knowledge being lost, and territory becoming more exposed.

The most worrying fact, however, is not only how many farms close, but who remains in charge of those that survive. The Department of Agriculture itself reminds us, in the new aid rules for farm succession, that in Catalonia 40.92% of farm managers are aged 65 or older, while those under 35 represent only 4.12%. In other words: generational renewal is not a future challenge. It is a present emergency.

Farmers as collective insurance

Across Europe the picture is similar. Eurostat reports that in 2020 there were 9.1 million farms in the EU, 5.3 million fewer than in 2005. In fifteen years nearly 37% of European farms have vanished. Moreover, 57.6% of farm managers were aged 55 or older, while only 11.9% were under 40. Yes, the EU remains a major agri-food power. But it rests on an increasingly aging, concentrated and fragile base.

This deterioration is not explained by a single cause. It is the result of accumulated pressures. On the one hand, farmers have long denounced insufficient farm-gate prices, the excessive power of large retail chains, and competition from imported products that do not always comply with the same standards required here. We already warned about this at 11Onze in 2021: when producing stops being profitable, the system does not become cheaper—it is dismantled.

On the other hand, Brussels has had to admit that the protests of 2024 were no anecdote. The European Commission itself recognizes that the first year of implementation of the CAP plans coincided with the impact of the war in Ukraine, rising costs and adverse climate phenomena. For this reason, it launched simplification packages in 2024 and 2025 to reduce administrative burdens and give farmers more flexibility. When bureaucracy has to be urgently simplified, it is because it had previously become a burden.

Farmers are also strategic infrastructure

In Catalonia, drought has also acted as an accelerator of every vulnerability. The Catalan Water Agency acknowledges that the drought episode experienced between early 2021 and March 2025 has exceeded all historical records in extent, intensity and duration. This is not a meteorological detail. It is a structural shock to food production. And when water fails, much more than a harvest fails: confidence in the continuity of the system collapses.

That is why it is a mistake to think of farming only as an economic sector. Farming is also a strategic reserve. Just as gold is a monetary reserve because it preserves value outside the system of financial promises, food production is a physical reserve because it ensures access to essentials beyond the fragility of global supply chains. Gold cannot be printed. Wheat cannot either. A currency may lose credibility. A harvest, if it exists and is nearby, continues to feed.

This is the key intuition of the article about becoming the governor of your own central bank: serious wealth is not built only with numbers on a screen but with real assets. Assets without counterparty risk or with immediate utility. Gold fulfills the first function: protecting purchasing power and acting as insurance against errors in the monetary system. It is no coincidence that in 2025 global gold demand, including OTC, exceeded 5,000 tonnes for the first time, nor that central banks added another 863 tonnes. The market is saying with real money that confidence in tangible assets is increasing.

Food fulfills the second function: sustaining life and social cohesion. Without food, no economic order can stand. That is why it is so serious that Europe has tolerated for years the disappearance of millions of farms while trusting that the global market would take care of the rest. Global markets work very well until they stop working. We saw it during the pandemic. We saw it during the war. We have seen it with energy. And we will see it again with food if we continue to push farmers aside.

Why the countryside is a national insurance

Some still see support for farming as a cost. It is exactly the opposite. It is collective insurance. Having viable local farming means having greater capacity to absorb external shocks, greater control over prices and supply, more employment rooted in the territory, and greater autonomy in the face of decisions taken far from the country. The 2026 DUN is already expected to cover around 45,000 agricultural holdings in Catalonia. The figure alone indicates two things at once: the sector is still alive, but the margin to lose more productive base is increasingly narrow.

The real debate, therefore, is not agricultural. It is civilizational. Do we want to be a society that still knows how to produce what it eats, or a society that only knows how to buy it? Do we want real reserves or to continue depending exclusively on financial, logistical and political structures that we do not control? When a country abandons its farmers, it does not only lose farmers. It loses sovereignty. It loses resilience. It loses its future.

At 11Onze we are clear about this. If you want to think like the governor of your own central bank, you must understand that your security does not depend only on your bank account. It also depends on how you protect your savings with real assets such as physical gold, and on how you defend the ecosystems that make life possible, starting with farmers and food production. Because true wealth is not only about preserving value. It is about preserving the capacity to live. And that means protecting what cannot be printed: the gold that preserves wealth and the farmers who feed us.

If you want to discover the best option to protect your savings, enter Preciosos 11Onze. We will help you buy at the best price the safe-haven asset par excellence: physical gold.

In the face of the climate emergency, the economy is tending to decarbonise at a rapid pace. Against a backdrop of rising taxes on polluting industries, a study shows that increasing the share of gold in a diversified investment portfolio reduces its overall carbon footprint without affecting returns.

EU data confirm that Europe experienced its warmest summer ever in 2022 and that global temperatures over the past eight years have been the highest since records began. The pace of global warming urges a drastic reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. This is the only way to avoid the catastrophic consequences associated with climate change.

Given this reality, the process of decarbonising the economy is such an urgent priority that it is conditioning a large part of current political, business and investment decisions. In this regard, a report by the consultancy Urgentem concludes that the inclusion of gold in a diversified investment portfolio “can have a positive impact on portfolio performance from a climate transition perspective”, as it reduces the overall carbon footprint of the portfolio without impacting returns. 

More gold, fewer emissions

The study analysed how diversified investment portfolios with different asset mixes would have performed over five years to determine how the inclusion of gold impacts the risk-return profile and the overall carbon footprint. 

Their conclusion is that, for example, in a portfolio with 70% equities and 30% bonds, devoting 10% of that portfolio to gold would reduce emissions by 7% while increasing the percentage of gold to 20% would reduce emissions by 17%. Furthermore, there are clear indications that the inclusion of gold in the portfolio improves the risk-return profile.

Although none of the asset mixes analysed would achieve the zero emissions target by 2050, the ones that would come closest would be those that include a higher percentage dedicated to gold. In fact, the only ones that manage to reduce emissions are those that devote at least 20% of their investment to gold.

In terms of the contribution of investment portfolios to the projected global temperature rise up to 2100, gold would also play a very positive role in mitigating its climate impact. The study estimates that devoting half of the portfolio to gold would result in a 40% reduction (more than 1 °C) in the warming generated by that portfolio. A portfolio with 70% equities and 30% bonds would generate an increase of 2.96 °C, while a portfolio with 45% equities, 5% bonds and 50% gold would only increase it by 1.76 °C.

What if emissions’ taxes were raised?

One of the main policy tools to curb climate change and accelerate the transition to an emission-free economy is the taxation of greenhouse gas emissions. In this respect, analysis of carbon dioxide prices shows that a higher proportion of gold will help reduce the market risk for a portfolio. The more stringent emission reduction policies become, the more desirable it will be to increase the share of gold in the portfolio.

The authors of the study admit that the limited time frame (five years) of the data initially collected and the relative outperformance of gold over this period may have biased expectations of gold returns, but they caution that longer-term analysis also confirms the favourable effect of gold inclusion on the return profile of the portfolio, albeit to a lesser extent. 

Moreover, the report’s authors assume that an investor inherits a substantial proportion of the carbon footprint associated with gold mining and production. Their forward-looking analysis, therefore, allows them to assess how much portfolios would be affected by the potential decarbonisation of this precious metal.

If you want to discover the best option to protect your savings, enter Preciosos 11Onze. We will help you buy at the best price the safe-haven asset par excellence: physical gold.

According to data from the National Securities Market Commission (CNMV), banks have stakes in up to 174 companies in the energy sector. The percentage of shares held by these financial institutions ensures that they have decision-making powers on Boards of Directors and Shareholders’ Meetings.

Large banking institutions have stakes in many energy companies through shares or directorships in key management positions, which allows them to influence the management of these companies and the way in which the management of the energy transition takes shape.

CaixaBank is one of the most active banks in this sector, participating in companies such as Naturgy and TotalEnergies. In the case of Naturgy, CaixaBank was a majority shareholder of Repsol until 2019. The financial institution maintains its control over these companies through CriteriaCaixa and has directors in key positions in the energy companies.

For its part, Bankia also has members on the boards of Red Eléctrica de España, while Banco Santander has stakes in companies such as Endesa in Chile, Técnicas Reunidas and ENCE Energía & Celulosa. Banco Sabadell also has a significant presence in the energy sector, with board members in Repsol, ENCE Energía & Celulosa and Enagas.

Conflict of interest

Bearing in mind that the energy crisis has sent the price of energy soaring and, therefore, the profits of these companies – big banks and the main energy companies have accumulated more than 64,000 in profits during the three years of pandemic and inflationary crisis – it is difficult to justify those who are allergic to public intervention in these economic sectors.

It is interesting that the same actors opposed to government intervention seem to have no problem in perpetuating and justifying the revolving doors. A profitable business, which, by signing former presidents and ministers onto the boards of banks and energy companies, has facilitated the electricity oligopoly in the Spanish energy market, preserving price manipulation at the expense of the consumer, and with extraordinary profits for these two sectors of the economy.

The solutions to the problems arising from the conflict of interests of the shareholders of these companies cannot be limited to one-off tax impositions on the financial and energy sectors after they have made extraordinary profits. If we want to eliminate the problem outright, perhaps we would do well to ask ourselves what is being paid for when a politician, with no relevant education or experience, is hired for a position in a bank or electricity company.

11Onze is the community fintech of Catalonia. Open an account by downloading the super app El Canut for Android or iOS and join the revolution!

The green transition promises clean energy, sovereignty, and sustainability. But behind solar panels, batteries and electric cars lie new geopolitical bottlenecks. The green future also has owners. And they are not European.

The fight against climate change has become a global political and economic priority. But reducing this process to an environmental issue is a mistake. The ecological transition is, above all, a reconfiguration of global power. And Europe runs the risk of replacing its dependence on oil and gas with a new “green” dependence on critical minerals controlled by third countries, with a direct impact on prices, inflation and economic security.

For decades, the global economy has revolved around oil, gas, and uranium. These resources have shaped alliances, wars, inflation and structural dependencies. Today, the narrative is different, but the material base remains essential. The green transition does not eliminate dependence on resources: it transforms it.

The new protagonists are lithium, cobalt, nickel, copper and rare earths. Without these minerals there are no batteries, no solar panels, no wind turbines and no electric mobility. No green technology is immaterial. Every “clean” device has behind it an intensive extractive chain, often invisible to the final consumer.

Demand for these resources is growing exponentially. According to data from the European Commission, an electric car requires up to six times more minerals than a combustion vehicle. The technological shift is profound, but the economic logic remains the same: whoever controls the resource controls the system.

The real map of green power

The official narrative speaks of transition, diversification, and autonomy. But the real map of critical mineral supply tells a different story. Control is heavily concentrated in a few countries, many of them outside the European sphere.

China is the central actor. It dominates the refining of rare earths, lithium and cobalt, and controls key stages of the value chain, even if it is not always the main extractor. The Democratic Republic of the Congo concentrates more than 70% of global cobalt, often under highly questionable social and environmental conditions. Chile, Argentina, and Australia lead lithium extraction.

Europe, by contrast, is structurally dependent. It imports 98% of the rare earths it consumes and relies heavily on external sources for most critical minerals, according to data from the European Commission and the US Geological Survey. The European green transition is built, paradoxically, on resources it does not control.

The new green dependency

Replacing Russian gas with Chinese or African minerals does not eliminate vulnerability. It shifts it. This new green dependency exposes Europe to geopolitical tensions, trade restrictions and increasingly frequent economic blackmail.

The example is clear: in 2023, China imposed restrictions on the export of gallium and germanium, key minerals for the technological and energy industries. A move that shook global supply chains and highlighted the extent to which the green transition is also a geopolitical weapon.

According to the International Monetary Fund, geopolitical fragmentation of global trade increases the risks of shortages, price volatility and structural inflationary pressures. The energy transition, without material sovereignty, may become a source of permanent economic instability.

Who ultimately pays for the transition?

The cost of dependency always falls downward. When resources become more expensive or scarce, the system does not absorb the shock: it passes it on. Higher energy prices, rising industrial costs and subsidies sustained by public debt inevitably filter through to final prices. The green transition, as it is currently being implemented, is not economically neutral: it generates inflationary pressures that directly impact citizens’ purchasing power.

This impact goes far beyond the energy bill. It affects food, housing and mobility, and places particular strain on the middle classes, which once again act as the system’s main shock absorber. Data show that rising energy costs and industrial inputs have been a key factor in recent inflation, eroding savings and reducing the room for manoeuvre of households and businesses. The question is no longer whether the transition is necessary, but who truly bears its cost.

Here a structural contradiction emerges: there is no sustainability without sovereignty. Europe speaks of reindustrialisation and strategic autonomy, but arrives late, with high costs and strong social resistance. Recycling is essential, but insufficient to meet growing demand for critical minerals. Meanwhile, the global race for resources advances and the margin for manoeuvre shrinks. Can we speak of sustainability if we depend on other powers to make it possible? This is the uncomfortable question Europe has yet to answer.

The green future is also power

The green future is also power. The ecological transition is not only a climatic or technological issue, but one of control, resources and economic sovereignty. Changing the energy model without rethinking who controls raw materials is replacing one dependency with another. And in this balance of forces, Europe starts at a disadvantage.

If the sustainable future is not built with geopolitical realism, the cost will not be borne by markets or large corporations, but by citizens. Higher prices, persistent inflation and reduced economic decision-making capacity are the toll of a transition designed without control over critical resources. Sustainability, without sovereignty, becomes fragile and socially regressive.

At 11Onze, we believe that talking about sustainability without talking about resources is self-deception. Understanding who controls the future is the first step to protecting savings, preserving economic freedom and maintaining decision-making capacity in an increasingly tense and fragmented world. Because true progress is not only green: it must also be fair, resilient, and sovereign.

If you want to discover fair insurance for your home and for society, check 11Onze Segurs.