Latest news with #Stable
Irish Times
7 days ago
- Lifestyle
- Irish Times
From tourist cliché to elegant emblem: Stable puts a modern, romantic twist on the shamrock
Since its launch in 2016 for the centenary of the Easter Rising, Stable of Ireland's tricolour scarf, a new take on the familiar green, white and orange of the national flag, has become one of the company's enduring best sellers. The subtle tones of the design – green seaweeds of Donegal , deep orange montbretia (known in the west as the back-to-school flower) and grey limestone of the Burren – were specially chosen to reflect the wild Irish landscape. Now Sonia Reynolds and Frances Duff , founders of Stable, have turned their attention to another cherished Irish national emblem – the shamrock. With their signature play on the familiar, they have thrust the shamrock into another limelight with a capsule collection of classic pieces embellished with bold and vibrant images of the much-loved trefoil, giving it a whole new look. It's the culmination of four years' work. 'We had been playing with versions and ideas of what we might do in various forms and materials,' they say. The word shamrock comes from the Irish seamróg, meaning young clover. Associated with St Patrick, who used the shamrock to explain the Holy Trinity, its significance grew into a broader emblem of Irish identity. The tradition of wearing it on St Patrick's Day dates back to the early 1700s, and became widespread in the 19th century. READ MORE Stable are using it in fresh and unexpected new ways. 'It's about trying to have some fun and give back some style, elegance and creativity to the shamrock,' says Duff. [ Fashion's future stars: Student designers create playful, sustainable collections Opens in new window ] She and Reynolds have been intrigued for a long time by the idea of doing something with the age-old Irish image. 'It has been hijacked as a tourist-driven symbol of Ireland, and that was a challenge from our point of view.' Small shamrock green silk dress, €680 Small shamrock top in green, €320 Small shamrock print orange silk dress, €680 Small shamrock skirt in green, €320 Abstract shamrock print green silk dress, €680 The pieces in summery silk satin consist of a top, skirt and dress, accessorised with matching belts and scarves in two print patterns – abstract and small – in three colour ways. In researching various textile patterns they worked with a long-standing friend – the textile designer Peter Westcott, who has an extensive 19th and 20th century print and textile archive in the UK. They finally selected a shamrock print from the 1920s. All the garments are framed with contrasting stripes – vertical on the dress and tops, horizontal on the skirts – creating a visual playfulness. The dress pattern was designed to be generous in shape and elegant, based on a kaftan style, and comfortable to wear open or belted. The top is a short version of the dress, and the skirt is A-line with an elasticated waist. Belts double up as scarves or headbands. 'We wanted to keep it simple,' says Reynolds, as she folds up all the items into a tiny lightweight pile to demonstrate how they easily pack for summer travel. 'It's about wearable pieces that can take you anywhere.' Prices start at €320 for tops and skirts, €680 for dresses, from and in store, Stable at Westbury Mall. Photographer Gina Crighton; model Lily Lyons; hair and make up @nikkiwhelenartist; accessories by Cristina @vintagecristina.
National Observer
23-05-2025
- Business
- National Observer
Coalition urges Carney to drop nuclear from energy plan
A coalition of First Nations, physicians and environmental organizations is ramping up pressure on Prime Minister Mark Carney to drop nuclear energy from his 'energy superpower' strategy, warning it comes with high costs, long delays and long-term risks. In an open letter, dozens of organizations urge the federal government to halt funding for nuclear development and instead prioritize renewables, energy efficiency and storage. The letter warns that new nuclear projects are likely to increase electricity costs while delaying meaningful climate action. 'We are concerned that you may be unduly influenced by the nuclear and fossil industry lobbies,' reads the letter. During the federal election campaign, Carney pledged to make Canada 'the world's leading energy superpower,' focusing on clean and conventional energy. His platform promised faster project approvals and a national clean electricity grid, among other energy promises. The coalition sent their letter in an effort to ensure Carney does not invest more significantly in nuclear energy, as he prepares to set his government's agenda and ministers' mandates. While Carney's plan doesn't mention nuclear energy, he praised it during the first leaders' debate and referenced two companies in the sector he previously worked with at Brookfield Asset Management. Nuclear energy is frequently cited as a clean, reliable alternative to fossil fuels. Agencies from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to the International Energy Agency expect nuclear power to have a role in the energy transition. Nuclear power has been part of Canada's electricity mix since the 1960s, with 22 reactors at five plants across three provinces now supplying about 15 per cent of the country's electricity. In an open letter, dozens of organizations urge the federal government to halt funding for nuclear development and instead prioritize renewables, energy efficiency and storage. The federal government — through the Canada Infrastructure Bank — has committed $970 million in low-cost financing to Ontario's Darlington New Nuclear Project, which aims to build Canada's first grid-scale small modular reactor. The federal government also invested millions in Moltex Clean Energy, a New Brunswick-based company developing a technology called Waste to Stable Salt, which aims to recycle nuclear waste into new energy. Jean-Pierre Finet, spokesperson for le Regroupement des organismes environnementaux en énergie, one of the organizations that signed the open letter, said he worries about the long-term future of any nuclear plants built today without a plan for their waste. 'We object to our federal taxpayer dollars being spent on developing more nuclear reactors that could be abandoned in place, ultimately transforming communities into radioactively contaminated sites and nuclear waste dumps that will require more federal dollars to clean up,' Finet said. Gordon Edwards, president of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility and a longtime nuclear critic, says the federal government is backing the slowest and most expensive energy option on the table. 'In a climate emergency, you have to invest in things that are faster and cheaper,' Edwards said. 'Canada hasn't built new reactors in decades. There's no practical experience left, and what's being proposed now is largely speculative.' 'We're very concerned about a misappropriation of public money and investment in what we see as a losing strategy,' Edwards said, stressing that the coalition is not asking private companies to stop building plants — but rather asking the federal government to stop subsidizing them. Canada's electricity demand is expected to double — or even triple — by 2050, driven by population growth, electrified transportation and industrial decarbonization. In Ontario, the Independent Electricity System Operator projects a 75 per cent increase in demand by mid-century. To meet this demand, the Ford government is heavily investing in nuclear power to meet Ontario's growing electricity demand, banking on small modular reactors and nuclear refurbishments as key pillars of its long-term energy strategy. But Edwards points to the Ford government's cancellation of over 750 renewable energy contracts in 2018, and argues that those lost projects could have already been delivering clean, reliable power today, instead of relying on increasing nuclear energy. International concerns echo at home Much of the current controversy focuses on Ontario's Darlington New Nuclear Project, as growing skepticism around the cost of small modular reactors mirrors global concerns. In the US, two nuclear reactors in South Carolina were abandoned after $12.5 billion (CAD) had already been spent, triggering the bankruptcy of Westinghouse Nuclear — now owned by Canadian firms Brookfield and Cameco. Meanwhile, two completed Vogtle reactors in Georgia came in at $48 billion, more than double the original $19-billion estimate, making them among the most expensive infrastructure projects in US history. In the UK and Europe, new nuclear power project efforts are facing delays, budget overruns, or outright cancellations. Meanwhile, a report from the Ontario Clean Air Alliance estimates that electricity from new nuclear power will cost up to 3.6 times more than onshore wind, three times more than solar, and nearly twice as much as offshore wind. It argues that Ontario could meet its energy needs more cheaply and quickly by expanding renewable generation and grid connections with neighbouring provinces. Ontario Power Generation has pushed back against this criticism, saying the Darlington small modular reactor will reuse existing infrastructure, avoid land-use issues common to wind and solar, and help maintain grid stability with 24/7 baseload power. The company argues that renewables require large land areas and new transmission lines, and may face more complex supply chain risks. Still, some energy experts say the small modular reactor path is out of sync with climate timelines and economic realities. 'Nuclear is a very high-cost and high-risk option,' said Mark Winfield, professor at York University and co-chair of its Sustainable Energy Initiative. 'These subsidies divert resources from much less costly and lower-risk options for decarbonizing energy systems. The focus on nuclear can delay more substantive climate action.' Winfield calls small modular reactors 'a distraction and likely a dead end,' warning that the technology carries catastrophic accident, safety, security and weapons proliferation risks not found in any other form of energy production. Winfield said Canada lacks a significant comparative advantage in energy production beyond its legacy hydro assets, and remains a relatively high-cost fossil fuel producer. 'There is no reason to believe that we would be better at other energy production technologies (nuclear, renewables) than anyone else,' Winfield added in an email.
