The electric car comes to a grinding halt

Car manufacturers are backtracking on electric cars in the wake of slowing global demand, and are extending their scheduled date for ending the production of internal combustion engines. High prices, cutbacks on incentives and a lack of reliable charging points have deterred consumers.

Since February 2023, when the European Union ratified legislation that from 2035 would ban the sale and registration of all vehicles emitting CO₂ emissions, as a central pillar of the European Green Pact, the reality of the electric car market is forcing a change of course that calls into question the strategy established to achieve emission reduction targets.

Electric cars are still selling, but they need to sell in much bigger volumes. The latest report from the European Commission’s Alternative Fuels Observatory (EAFO) shows that electric car penetration in the European Union remains very low. Light-duty vehicles with electric and hybrid engines account for only 6.15% of the total fleet, or around 18 million of the almost 290 million vehicles on the road in Europe.

Moreover, electric vehicle registrations are declining in the European Union as a whole. In the first half of the year, pure electric vehicles accounted for 12.5% of registrations, compared with 12.9% the previous year, according to data from the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association (ACEA). On the other hand, plug-in hybrid vehicles have lost half a percentage point of market share, from 7.4% in the same period of 2023 to 6.9% this year.

June’s electric car sales data continues this trend, losing 1% of their market share, while registrations of plug-in hybrid vehicles fell to 19.9%. This is a significant slowdown in the electric vehicle market when taking into account that total registrations – electric and combustion vehicles – during this month increased by 4.3%, and by 4.6% for the first six months of the year as a whole, compared to the same period last year.

Sales of electric vehicles have not only fallen across the board in Europe. In Q1 2024, the United States experienced a 7.3% decline in total electric car sales compared to Q4 2023. Only the continued growth of the Chinese car market, which accounts for 60% of global EV sales, is reversing this downward trend.

When the numbers don’t add up

After investing billions of euros in the development of new electric platforms, brands such as Ford, General Motors, Mercedes-Benz, Volkswagen and the Stellantis group have announced that they have experienced a significant drop in electric vehicle orders.

The response from the automotive industry has not been long in coming, and for months now they have been announcing production cuts, factory closures and a rethink of their goals of becoming pure electric vehicle manufacturers by the end of this decade.

In this context, the Volkswagen Group has scrapped the possibility of opening a new plant around Wolfsburg, as planned, and has warned of the possible closure of Audi’s electric car factory in Brussels. Mercedes has cancelled the development of a new electric platform to concentrate its efforts on new, more affordable, combustion-engined vehicles.

But the European industry is playing against the clock – 2035 is the deadline for selling combustion vehicles and, as of today, this ban is still in force. However, the ban faces resistance from several quarters, who question the feasibility and impact of such a measure. MEPs agreed to a derogation until the end of 2035 for manufacturers with small annual production volumes and for the use of synthetic fuels.

Manfred Weber, leader of the European People’s Party (EPP), has called the ban “a mistake” after the European Parliament elections and promised that the party would discuss its repeal “in the coming days”. He is not the only voice among Eurocrats arguing for a less restrictive deal, and ultimately it will be decided in 2027 whether the legislation will be enforced.

From theory to reality

High prices, cut incentives and a lack of reliable recharging points have deterred consumers. The Organisation of Consumers and Users (OCU) points to some of these factors as the main obstacles to the mass adoption of electric vehicles in Spain. According to the organisation, the use of electric vehicles is impractical without a place where they can be recharged daily at an affordable price, either at home or at the workplace.

On the other hand, the exorbitant prices of electric vehicles exclude buyers with lower purchasing power, i.e. the majority of the population in our country and in much of Europe, who demand more affordable vehicles. It is not surprising, therefore, that the Dacia Sandero was the best-selling car in the EU in the first half of the year, to the detriment of the Tesla Model Y, which has fallen from first place in 2023 to eighth this year, with a 26% drop in sales.

Another source of problems for the electric vehicle industry has to do with allegations of planned obsolescence. From batteries that, due to their high cost, are neither repairable nor replaceable, to software updates that give total control to manufacturers to the detriment of independent garages and owners, they limit the lifespan of electric cars, leave users feeling cheated and call into question the green credentials of this type of vehicle.

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

The number of people living in slave-like conditions has been growing steadily since 2016 and it is no secret that mass production of cheap goods often relies on factories in developing countries where people work in subhuman conditions. So why do we continue to ignore the issue as consumers?

The latest estimates from the Global Slavery Index’s annual report indicate that 50 million people worldwide are victims of modern slavery and that almost 10 million more men, women, girls and boys have been forced into labour or marriage since 2016.

Although modern slavery can take many forms, regarding labour, we refer to it as a condition of exploitation whereby a person, today, is forced to work in subhuman conditions without being able to refuse because of coercion, threats or abuse of power, among others.

Tragedies such as the one in Bangladesh in 2013, when the Rana Plaza building collapsed, killing 1134 people and injuring 2500, or the fire at the school bag factory in Delhi in 2019, where dozens of workers who produced goods and garments for Western clothing brands died, exposed the role of the fashion industry in modern slavery.

It is a secret that has been hidden in plain sight for years. From raw materials to manufacturing to packaging to delivery, modern slavery is embedded in the supply chains of the global garment industry that meets consumer demand in Europe, the United States and other developed economies.

The human cost of fast fashion

The fast fashion business model, initially popularised by large chains such as Zara and H&M and recently joined by other brands such as Shein and Temu, is based on mass production and consumption that increases at the same speed as changing trends. Consumers buy clothes that are fashionable but of low quality and low cost.

The brands that offer this type of articles change their products frequently. To maximise profits, they carry out a policy of offshoring by manufacturing them in developing countries, paying workers low wages and even ignoring shortcomings in terms of safety or working conditions.

This production model is not only very aggressive towards the environment and has led the textile industry to become the second most polluting in the world but entails complex and opaque supply chains, many of them marred by forced labour.

Our responsibility as consumers

Today’s globalised supply chains indeed make it almost impossible to prevent the goods or services we consume from being free from the scourge of exploitation or even slavery. Still, this cannot be an excuse for shirking our responsibility as consumers to inform ourselves about how a product is made, rather than simply choosing the cheapest one.

Cultural relativism or the trivialisation of the concept of slavery can help us to lessen our sense of guilt, but these semantic gymnastics cannot let us forget that, as consumers, we can play an important role in fostering collective awareness through responsible shopping and demanding more concrete actions from big brands to tackle a systemic problem that we have all perpetuated.

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!

In recent years, the belief that our poor email management is highly harmful to the environment has spread out. The latest research relativises its impact and points to other digital habits as responsible for a significant part of global warming.

The book ‘How Bad Are Bananas? The Carbon Footprint of Everything’, published in 2010, popularised the idea that emails have a large carbon footprint. Its author estimated that each message, even if it is just to reply “thank you”, generates a minimum of 0.3 grams of CO₂ due to the energy consumption associated with our devices and, above all, with large data centres. And it should be borne in mind that between 150 billion and 300 billion emails are sent daily around the world, although most of them are ‘spam’.

Some recent research relativises this alleged environmental damage of our messages. Apart from freeing up some space on the servers that host them, there is no evidence that it substantially reduces the energy consumption of the digital infrastructure if we avoid our expendable emails and delete unnecessary ones. 

We very rarely switch on a mobile phone or computer just to send an email and both storage and data transmission systems run relentlessly, even when we are not using them, so energy consumption remains fairly stable.

An updated perspective

With the new estimates, it is estimated that heating water in a kettle requires more electricity than sending and storing a thousand e-mails. And deleting that thousand messages from our inbox would have a carbon benefit of about five grams of CO₂, the minimum our computer would generate in half an hour if we kept it on to delete them. Although it may be hard to comprehend, manually deleting emails can have a greater impact on carbon emissions than storing them.

In fact, the first effective measure to limit the carbon footprint of email is to reduce as much as possible the number of electronic devices we buy to manage it and to keep them as long as possible, as their manufacture generates a significant carbon footprint. 

But above all, safeguarding the environment means using energy-efficient devices and rationalising the time we keep them switched on: we should not forget that part of the electricity we use to power these devices comes from fossil fuels.

The source of excessive traffic

Obviously, avoiding unnecessary emails, writing concisely, including hyperlinks to files rather than attachments, limiting the number of recipients, regularly emptying the ‘spam’ folder and unsubscribing from newsletters that do not really interest us are best practices that will reduce Internet traffic. But if we really want to contribute with our digital habits to the good health of the planet, we should look beyond our e-mail. 

Email exchanges account for only 1% of Internet traffic, which is tiny compared to video streaming services, which already account for more than 80% of what goes online. And that is an appreciable amount of tons of CO₂.

If you want to wash your clothes without polluting the planet, 11Onze Recommends Natulim.

No economy is sovereign if it does not control its energy. And no citizen is truly free if they depend on infrastructures they cannot influence or understand. Sovereignty is not an abstract concept: it is a matter of energy and money.

For years, we assumed that globalization was synonymous with efficiency. Producing far away reduced costs, importing energy seemed like a rational decision, and delegating monetary policy was perceived as a guarantee of stability. This model was built on the idea that global flows would remain constant and that major centers of power would act as solid and predictable pillars.

But crises have shattered this narrative decisively. The war in Ukraine exposed Europe’s energy fragility, while the inflation of 2022 showed how any tension in energy markets immediately translates into the cost of living. Added to this is a global debt exceeding 330% of world GDP, a clear indicator of the structural strain in the financial system.

The conclusion is increasingly evident: energy dependence and financial dependence are not separate phenomena, but two sides of the same vulnerability. When one fails, the other is affected, and the entire system is exposed. Understanding this relationship is key to interpreting the present and anticipating the changes already underway.

Energy: the root of all economy

Without energy, there is no production. And without production, there is no wealth. The 20th-century model, based on large centralized infrastructures, has generated efficiency but also concentration of power. Today, more than 80% of global energy consumption still depends on fossil fuels, with three clear consequences: geopolitical vulnerability, price volatility, and constant transfer of income to large corporations.

But the model is changing. The decline in renewable costs has opened the door to distributed production: energy communities, shared self-consumption, microgrids, and local generation. This is not theory. When a community produces energy, it reduces dependencies. When a company self-generates, it stabilizes costs. When a city deploys microgrids, it gains resilience. Decentralization does not replace the global system, but it makes it less fragile.

Energy and money: the key link

Energy has always been tied to monetary power. The petrodollar consolidated the dominance of the dollar for decades, but this balance is shifting with trade agreements outside its circuit. When the energy map changes, so does the monetary one.

In parallel, in an environment of inflation and high debt, investors return to real assets. Gold is the classic example, but energy production capacity is another often overlooked asset. Generating your own energy is not just sustainability: it is financial protection. In contrast, many digital models depend exclusively on systemic trust. The difference is clear: real assets have intrinsic value; promises depend on an issuer.

Practical sovereignty

Sovereignty is not an ideological issue, but a way of managing risk in an uncertain environment. In the energy field, it involves producing part of what we consume and diversifying sources to reduce dependence on external factors. It is not about absolute self-sufficiency, but about gaining response capacity to potential disruptions.

In the financial field, sovereignty involves understanding where we invest, diversifying risks, and avoiding dependence on a single monetary or institutional system. Decentralization, in this context, is not about isolating from the world, but about building a balance that allows participation with greater autonomy and less vulnerability.

What is already happening

The data confirms it with increasing force: domestic self-consumption is growing, energy communities are expanding across Europe, central banks are increasing gold reserves, and trade agreements outside the dollar circuit are multiplying. These are not isolated phenomena, but converging signals of a deeper shift. We are not facing an ideological revolution, but a systemic adaptation to an increasingly volatile, uncertain, and interdependent environment. In this scenario, economies—and citizens—are seeking one very specific thing: resilience.

The lesson is clear and increasingly difficult to ignore: whoever controls energy controls economic room for maneuver, and whoever shapes the monetary system determines financial response capacity. Technology has already solved much of the limitations that made this unfeasible just a few decades ago. The question, therefore, is no longer technical, but cultural and strategic: are we willing to reduce dependencies and assume more control?

At 11Onze, we understand that protecting wealth is not just about choosing financial products, but about understanding the system in which we operate and the forces that drive it. Energy and money are its invisible pillars, and understanding how they interact is essential to making decisions with judgment, vision, and autonomy. Building real sovereignty involves diversifying, anticipating risks, and acting consciously.

Because the decentralized future is not a distant promise or a theoretical narrative. It is an infrastructure already being deployed—silently but relentlessly—that will redefine how we understand power, economy, and freedom.

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

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.