061/366: BatNinja [Uncertain Principles]

I took some shots of nature stuff on this morning’s dog walk, and a few good action shots at the last soccer game of the season. But honestly, the only thing anybody wants to see today is Halloween costumes, so here are the kids:

The Pip as Batman, SteelyKid as a ninja.

The Pip as Batman, SteelyKid as a ninja.

Cleverly, they both selected costumes that are predominantly black; we augmented these with glow-stick bracelets and flashlights while actually trick-or-treating, for improved visibility.

Putting these together required a good deal more GIMP work than I anticipated, because the raw shots for the two are at slightly different angles, so when I did the quick copy-and-paste thing, the mantel and bookshelves in the background were tilted at different angles on the different sides of the split frame, and that just made me twitch. So I had to go back and rotate both images slightly to square things up.

Right around one hour of trick-or-treating yielded roughly 2kg of candy. This didn’t remotely exhaust the possibilities in the neighborhood, just the stamina of the kids. With another year of training, I think we can easily break 5kg next year.



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1k0V9NA

I took some shots of nature stuff on this morning’s dog walk, and a few good action shots at the last soccer game of the season. But honestly, the only thing anybody wants to see today is Halloween costumes, so here are the kids:

The Pip as Batman, SteelyKid as a ninja.

The Pip as Batman, SteelyKid as a ninja.

Cleverly, they both selected costumes that are predominantly black; we augmented these with glow-stick bracelets and flashlights while actually trick-or-treating, for improved visibility.

Putting these together required a good deal more GIMP work than I anticipated, because the raw shots for the two are at slightly different angles, so when I did the quick copy-and-paste thing, the mantel and bookshelves in the background were tilted at different angles on the different sides of the split frame, and that just made me twitch. So I had to go back and rotate both images slightly to square things up.

Right around one hour of trick-or-treating yielded roughly 2kg of candy. This didn’t remotely exhaust the possibilities in the neighborhood, just the stamina of the kids. With another year of training, I think we can easily break 5kg next year.



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1k0V9NA

Best images of surprise Halloween comet

View larger. | 2015 TB145 captured using a 12

View larger. | 2015 TB145 captured using a 12″ S/C telescope and a Santa Barbara ST402ME camera, by Efrain Morales of the Astronomical Society of the Caribbean (SAC). Efrain’s images, combined to create this animation, show a lapse of 20 minutes. Images taken on October 30, 2015 at 0602 UTC from Aguadilla, Puerto Rico.

The object given an asteroid name – 2015 TB145 – which swept within 1.3 lunar distances of Earth earlier today (October 31, 2015) – is now believed to be a comet, according to observations by scientists using NASA’s Infrared Telescope Facility (IRTF) on Mauna Kea, Hawaii. They say the object has likely shed its volatiles after numerous passes around the sun. The object passed at about 302,000 miles (486,000 km), on October 31 – the Halloween holiday here North America – at 1700 UTC (1 p.m. EDT, 10 a.m. PDT).

Radar images of the dead comet generated by the National Science Foundation’s 305-meter (1,000-foot) Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico – found that it was bigger than estimates made before the close pass. The radar images from Arecibo show that the object is spherical in shape and approximately 2,000 feet (600 meters) in diameter and completes a rotation about once every five hours.

Click here for more on the close pass of 2015 TB145

This image of asteroid 2015 TB145, a dead comet, was generated using radar data collected by the National Science Foundation's 1,000-foot (305-meter) Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico. The radar image was taken on Oct. 30, 2015, and the image resolution is 25 feet (7.5 meters) per pixel. Image credit: NAIC-Arecibo/NSF

Boo! This image of the close-passing object on Halloween, 2015, clearly looks like a skull! It was generated using radar data collected by the National Science Foundation’s 1,000-foot (305-meter) Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico. The radar image was taken on October 30, 2015. Image resolution is 25 feet (7.5 meters) per pixel. Image credit: NAIC-Arecibo/NSF

View larger. |

View larger. | A series of radar images via the Arecibo telescope in Puerto Rico.

Here's a closer look at one of the Arecibo radar images, above.

Here’s a closer look at one of the Arecibo radar images, above.

View larger. | René Torres - a follower of the Astronomical Society of the Caribbean (SAC) - captured this photo captured from Caguas, Puerto Rico. The asteroid is seen moving across a span of just 100 seconds (just over one-and-a-half minutes).

View larger. | René Torres – of the Astronomical Society of the Caribbean (SAC) – captured this photo captured from Caguas, Puerto Rico. The asteroid is seen moving across a span of just 100 seconds (just over one-and-a-half minutes).

Object 015 TB145 via Slooh.com. The asteroid is the tiny line near the middle. Because it came so close to Earth, it appears to be moving in front of the fixed background stars.

Object 2015 TB145 via Slooh.com, which offers live shows with expert hosts. 2015 TB145 is the tiny line near the middle. Because it came so close to Earth, it appears to be moving in front of the fixed background stars.

View larger. | Taken by Slooh's telescope in Chile, in the days before closest approach.

View larger. | Another image provided by Slooh.com, in the days before closest approach.



from EarthSky http://ift.tt/1kiOnT8
View larger. | 2015 TB145 captured using a 12

View larger. | 2015 TB145 captured using a 12″ S/C telescope and a Santa Barbara ST402ME camera, by Efrain Morales of the Astronomical Society of the Caribbean (SAC). Efrain’s images, combined to create this animation, show a lapse of 20 minutes. Images taken on October 30, 2015 at 0602 UTC from Aguadilla, Puerto Rico.

The object given an asteroid name – 2015 TB145 – which swept within 1.3 lunar distances of Earth earlier today (October 31, 2015) – is now believed to be a comet, according to observations by scientists using NASA’s Infrared Telescope Facility (IRTF) on Mauna Kea, Hawaii. They say the object has likely shed its volatiles after numerous passes around the sun. The object passed at about 302,000 miles (486,000 km), on October 31 – the Halloween holiday here North America – at 1700 UTC (1 p.m. EDT, 10 a.m. PDT).

Radar images of the dead comet generated by the National Science Foundation’s 305-meter (1,000-foot) Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico – found that it was bigger than estimates made before the close pass. The radar images from Arecibo show that the object is spherical in shape and approximately 2,000 feet (600 meters) in diameter and completes a rotation about once every five hours.

Click here for more on the close pass of 2015 TB145

This image of asteroid 2015 TB145, a dead comet, was generated using radar data collected by the National Science Foundation's 1,000-foot (305-meter) Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico. The radar image was taken on Oct. 30, 2015, and the image resolution is 25 feet (7.5 meters) per pixel. Image credit: NAIC-Arecibo/NSF

Boo! This image of the close-passing object on Halloween, 2015, clearly looks like a skull! It was generated using radar data collected by the National Science Foundation’s 1,000-foot (305-meter) Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico. The radar image was taken on October 30, 2015. Image resolution is 25 feet (7.5 meters) per pixel. Image credit: NAIC-Arecibo/NSF

View larger. |

View larger. | A series of radar images via the Arecibo telescope in Puerto Rico.

Here's a closer look at one of the Arecibo radar images, above.

Here’s a closer look at one of the Arecibo radar images, above.

View larger. | René Torres - a follower of the Astronomical Society of the Caribbean (SAC) - captured this photo captured from Caguas, Puerto Rico. The asteroid is seen moving across a span of just 100 seconds (just over one-and-a-half minutes).

View larger. | René Torres – of the Astronomical Society of the Caribbean (SAC) – captured this photo captured from Caguas, Puerto Rico. The asteroid is seen moving across a span of just 100 seconds (just over one-and-a-half minutes).

Object 015 TB145 via Slooh.com. The asteroid is the tiny line near the middle. Because it came so close to Earth, it appears to be moving in front of the fixed background stars.

Object 2015 TB145 via Slooh.com, which offers live shows with expert hosts. 2015 TB145 is the tiny line near the middle. Because it came so close to Earth, it appears to be moving in front of the fixed background stars.

View larger. | Taken by Slooh's telescope in Chile, in the days before closest approach.

View larger. | Another image provided by Slooh.com, in the days before closest approach.



from EarthSky http://ift.tt/1kiOnT8

Comments of the Week #83: From galaxy death to the stability of matter [Starts With A Bang]

“As I was going up the stair I met a man who wasn’t there. He wasn’t there again today. I wish, I wish he’d stay away.” -Hughes Mearns

Although every week at Starts With A Bang is special, there’s something extra special brewing here. Sure, we’ve got the “normal stuff” of the articles we’ve written:

Including two bonus ones over at Forbes:

But before we jump into your comments, there are a few awesome announcements:

1.) Our first Patreon-sponsored podcast is complete! If you’ve ever been curious about water on Mars, life on Mars, or — thanks to a great Q&A with our guest — where I think the next fundamental breakthrough will come from, have a listen here:

If you want to propose a topic for future podcasts, appear on our podcast or get early access to the completed product, consider supporting our endeavors on Patreon!

2.) It’s Halloween! While more pictures are coming, I have to give you all a preview. So you may remember a few years ago I very, very excitedly told you all about Axe Cop, which turned out to be one of the best surprise comics and TV shows I’ve ever found.

Image credit: © Ethan Nicolle 2009-2015, of Ask Axe Cop #54, via http://ift.tt/1LITLrW.

Image credit: © Ethan Nicolle 2009-2015, of Ask Axe Cop #54, via http://ift.tt/1LITLrW.

Well, Axe Cop imagined himself with different hair and mustache styles, and the best one is Axe Cop with crazy pizza hair and a super-curly beard and mustache with a robot ghost that lives inside. (The best one, that is, according to Axe Cop, and that’s the only one that matters.)

Well, folks…

Image credit: The Hand-Eye Supply Curiosity Club, via Instagram.

Image credit: The Hand-Eye Supply Curiosity Club, via Instagram.

That’s your Halloween preview! More pictures coming (hopefully, and with much greater detail) tomorrow as part of our Weekend Diversion! And finally…

3.) Starts With A Bang is movin’ on up in the world! I’ve been guest-contributing at Forbes for a few months now, and they love what I’ve been doing there. In fact, they love it so much that I’m excited to announce my main blogging activities will switch over to there beginning on Monday!

Image credit: Forbes; screenshot from http://ift.tt/1GAyArz.

Image credit: Forbes; screenshot from http://ift.tt/1GAyArz.

Things will be a little different: we’ll still do Mostly Mute Mondays (but we won’t explicitly call it that); we’ll still do Throwback Thursdays (but won’t explicitly call it that); we’ll still have weekly songs (but they’ll be part of our Comments of the Week); and our Weekend Diversions will likely switch over to be more weekend wonder about the Universe.

But there’s a saying that when you go to the dance, you dance with the one who brought you. That’s part of the reason why I haven’t left Scienceblogs (or you guys!) after landing here more than six years ago, and part of the reason why I’m going to stay on at Medium as well: it’s the only platform that still gives readers a completely ad-free experience, and I want to be able to keep that! So I’ll still be posting synopses here and running our weekly Comments of the Week, but now they’ll be expanded to include even more awesome stuff.

And with all that said, it’s onto the best of your Comments of the Week!

Image credit: ESA (Image by C. Carreau).

Image credit: ESA (Image by C. Carreau).

From Johan on what happens after the death of galaxies: “But what happens then? :)

Well, there are two ways to look at it. One is to look at what we physically think is going to happen and at the other (unfavored) possibilities:

  • Favored: the Universe will continue to expand and cool until — with the exception of quantum motion — all thermal properties drop to absolute zero. Total energy is still conserved, and space and time continue for an eternity.
  • Disfavored: dark energy will increase in strength, leading to either the Big Rip or a rejuvenated (high-energy) Universe.
  • Disfavored: the expansion will reverse itself, leading to a Big Crunch or potentially a cyclic model.
  • Disfavored: the quantum vacuum will tunnel into a more stable state, leading to an ultra-weak version of a new Big Bang, potentially producing some sort of matter and/or radiation.
Image credit: NASA.

Image credit: NASA.

Or, the second way it to ask about a more personal perspective: what ultimately happens to us when the Universe comes to this ultimate end? Lucky for you, if that was what you meant, that’s the subject of our latest Ask Ethan! Enjoy thinking about it either way.

Image credit: NASA, ESA, the Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA)-ESA/Hubble Collaboration and A. Evans (University of Virginia, Charlottesville/NRAO/Stony Brook University), K. Noll (STScI), and J. Westphal (Caltech).

Image credit: NASA, ESA, the Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA)-ESA/Hubble Collaboration and A. Evans (University of Virginia, Charlottesville/NRAO/Stony Brook University), K. Noll (STScI), and J. Westphal (Caltech).

From Randall Griffin on galaxy mergers vs. dark energy: “Not sure how to square this discussion about the gravitational effects causing the Milky Way and Andromeda to merge with what I thought was still the accepted truth based on red shifts that all the stars are receding from one another and the universe is likely to expand forever.”

This is the cosmic struggle that takes place between everything pretty much always: the expansion of the Universe that works to drive everything apart, and the influence of gravity, that works to attract all masses towards one another. Given any sort of initial configuration, you can imagine the three possibilities that either gravity wins and things merge, the expansion wins and things recede from one another forever, or you’re right on the brink: the border between the two, and so your recession speed asymptotes to zero but you never merge back together.

So now, we come to our local group, dominated by the Milky Way and Andromeda.

What you might not realize — and this is a common misunderstanding — is that this struggle doesn’t just take place on a cosmic scale, where (thanks to dark energy) the expansion will definitely win. In addition, this struggle occurs between all the various structures in the Universe, including between individual stars, galaxies, groups and clusters.

In our particular case, gravity will win when it comes to all the stars in our galaxy, all the galaxies in our local group, and possibly a few galaxies in some nearby groups, but also possibly not on that last one. We became gravitationally bound to Andromeda before dark energy achieved the relative strength it did in the Universe, and that’s why we’ll remain bound to it forever, with an eventual merger occurring some 4 billion years in the future.

Image credit: E A Bell et al, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 2015, via http://ift.tt/1MBCT42.

Image credit: E A Bell et al, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 2015, via http://ift.tt/1MBCT42.

From Michael Kelsey on whether life-on-Earth originated with Earth: “In fact, there *ARE* non-biological processes which fractionate isotopes (that is the technical term for what’s going on). For the specific case of 12C/13C fractionation, there are “several” non-biological process which can produce this signature (see, for example, the news article in Science magazine, http://ift.tt/1kkAJz9), including iron-based catalysis of hydrocarbons from carbon monoxide (http://ift.tt/1LITNQC, although the Wiki article does not mention isotopic fractionation).”

From MobiusKlein, referencing the original (journal) article: “There are considerable limitations of basing any inference regarding early Earth on a single zircon containing primary carbonaceous inclusions. Instead, we see this contribution as demonstrating the feasibility of perhaps the only approach that could lead to establishing a Hadean carbon isotope record.”

It’s important to note that this isn’t a slam-dunk; this is evidence that supports an earlier start to life-on-Earth than we’d previously had evidence for, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that this is organic carbon. As Sinisa Lazarek noted, we found molecular oxygen on the comet Rosetta is orbiting, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that there’s some sort of photosynthetic process happening on the comet to produce it.

It means that it’s a possibility, and perhaps even probable, but that like with all science, we need more evidence, and we need to be able to more definitively exclude alternative explanations. It’s a process, and we’re getting there, but we still have a ways to go.

Image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech.

Image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech.

From Michael Hutson on panspermia: “What advantage does the panspermia hypothesis have over a terrestrial origin of life for explaining abiogenesis?”

The trite answer is “none,” since at some point, you need to go from non-life to life, as that’s the literal definition of abiogenesis, and that had to happen at some point in the Universe. I suppose it might not matter much whether that happened on Earth or before Earth to some, but it matters a whole lot to me. You see, life as we know it here on Earth is complicated.

It takes a very large number of DNA base pairs to make what we know as even the simplest living organism, and that form of “life” has proven thus far uncreatable in laboratory conditions from raw ingredients. But perhaps, if we accept the hypothesis that there are far simpler “living” organisms than anything we’ve ever found on Earth, and that what we see today is far more advanced and evolved (and hence, more able to out-compete the simpler ones), that means that life is not only more ubiquitous than we presently think, but that all Earth-life as we know it is just one thread that’s branched off from a common tapestry that the entire galaxy or Universe shares when it comes to living creatures.

That’s the attractiveness, at least to me, of the panspermia hypothesis.

From Naked Bunny With A Whip on where humans get their energy from:

02This one was just too funny.

Image credit: Dreamstime.

Image credit: Dreamstime.

From Janko on the stability of matter against decay: “And could it decay into a hypothetical positive charged “dark matter particle” instead? Is it possible? Could this particle have a baryon number?”

This is pretty unlikely, and I’ll tell you why. Assuming you don’t necessarily mean electric charge or color charge, yes, it’s possible that a by-product of say, proton decay could be a dark matter particle. Neutrinos, for example, are by-products of most theoretical pathways of proton decay, they have mass (and so, therefore, are a form of dark matter), and they have a weak hypercharge. But the dark matter that it would decay into wouldn’t in any realistic model have very much to do with the dark matter that dominates our Universe, which must be cold and have an extremely small (much smaller than neutrinos, for example) interaction cross-section.

The baryon number question is tricky, and while Michael Kelsey gave a great answer:

“DM almost certainly can’t have baryon number. If it did, then it would be included in our calculations of the photon/baryon ratio after the hot Big Bang. But it isn’t (which is one of the lines of evidence for the 5-to-1 discrepancy!).

Having said that, most models of baryogenesis introduce additional symmetries to the Standard Model which lead to both lepton (L) non-conservation and baryon (B) non-conservation, but leaves L-B as a conserved quantity. If the DM is implicated in baryogenesis (as some models propose), then it could carry L-B as a good quantum number.”

I’ll point out that there are plenty of theoretical particles that carry both lepton and baryon number (leptoquarks, the X and Y bosons from Grand Unified Theories), but they are generally both high-mass, and that the low-mass ones (like the light quarks) all have something else along with them: a color charge. Is it possible to have baryon number without a QCD interaction? Maybe, but if so, it’s nothing we have any evidence for, nor a successful theoretical framework for.

Image credit: Wikimedia Commons users Alchemist-hp (http://ift.tt/1bcWzg0) + Richard Bartz with focus stack.

Image credit: Wikimedia Commons users Alchemist-hp (http://ift.tt/1bcWzg0) + Richard Bartz with focus stack.

And finally, one last quickie from Michael Hutson: “Just what is the longest decay time we’ve experimentally observed?”

For any isotope of an element, as stated by other commenters, we’ve observed Tellurium-128. For the most stable isotope of any element, that would be Bismuth (shown above). Bismuth is interesting — as we’ve written about before — in that we once thought it was the heaviest stable element in the Universe. If you have a periodic table from about 2002 or earlier, it will tell you that Bismuth, at element 83, is the heaviest non-radioactive element. But if your periodic table was made from around 2003 or onwards, it says that Lead, element 82, is the heaviest non-radioactive element, because Bismuth decays with a half-life of 1.9 × 10^19 years. This is over a billion times as large as the present age of the Universe!

So what does this mean? It likely means that of the isotopes and elements we’ve observed, there are almost certainly a great many that we’ve observed to be stable that are not truly stable on long enough timescales. How many elements are radioactive given 10^50 years? Or 10^100, or 10^1000? All of them? At some level, there’s only so much we can learn with the Universe we have available to us, and this avenue of taking large collections of atoms and looking for a decay has its own limitations. The limit of what we’ve ever observed is just the beginning of what’s out there.

Thanks for a great week, and may your Halloween be fantastic!



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1PceQNH

“As I was going up the stair I met a man who wasn’t there. He wasn’t there again today. I wish, I wish he’d stay away.” -Hughes Mearns

Although every week at Starts With A Bang is special, there’s something extra special brewing here. Sure, we’ve got the “normal stuff” of the articles we’ve written:

Including two bonus ones over at Forbes:

But before we jump into your comments, there are a few awesome announcements:

1.) Our first Patreon-sponsored podcast is complete! If you’ve ever been curious about water on Mars, life on Mars, or — thanks to a great Q&A with our guest — where I think the next fundamental breakthrough will come from, have a listen here:

If you want to propose a topic for future podcasts, appear on our podcast or get early access to the completed product, consider supporting our endeavors on Patreon!

2.) It’s Halloween! While more pictures are coming, I have to give you all a preview. So you may remember a few years ago I very, very excitedly told you all about Axe Cop, which turned out to be one of the best surprise comics and TV shows I’ve ever found.

Image credit: © Ethan Nicolle 2009-2015, of Ask Axe Cop #54, via http://ift.tt/1LITLrW.

Image credit: © Ethan Nicolle 2009-2015, of Ask Axe Cop #54, via http://ift.tt/1LITLrW.

Well, Axe Cop imagined himself with different hair and mustache styles, and the best one is Axe Cop with crazy pizza hair and a super-curly beard and mustache with a robot ghost that lives inside. (The best one, that is, according to Axe Cop, and that’s the only one that matters.)

Well, folks…

Image credit: The Hand-Eye Supply Curiosity Club, via Instagram.

Image credit: The Hand-Eye Supply Curiosity Club, via Instagram.

That’s your Halloween preview! More pictures coming (hopefully, and with much greater detail) tomorrow as part of our Weekend Diversion! And finally…

3.) Starts With A Bang is movin’ on up in the world! I’ve been guest-contributing at Forbes for a few months now, and they love what I’ve been doing there. In fact, they love it so much that I’m excited to announce my main blogging activities will switch over to there beginning on Monday!

Image credit: Forbes; screenshot from http://ift.tt/1GAyArz.

Image credit: Forbes; screenshot from http://ift.tt/1GAyArz.

Things will be a little different: we’ll still do Mostly Mute Mondays (but we won’t explicitly call it that); we’ll still do Throwback Thursdays (but won’t explicitly call it that); we’ll still have weekly songs (but they’ll be part of our Comments of the Week); and our Weekend Diversions will likely switch over to be more weekend wonder about the Universe.

But there’s a saying that when you go to the dance, you dance with the one who brought you. That’s part of the reason why I haven’t left Scienceblogs (or you guys!) after landing here more than six years ago, and part of the reason why I’m going to stay on at Medium as well: it’s the only platform that still gives readers a completely ad-free experience, and I want to be able to keep that! So I’ll still be posting synopses here and running our weekly Comments of the Week, but now they’ll be expanded to include even more awesome stuff.

And with all that said, it’s onto the best of your Comments of the Week!

Image credit: ESA (Image by C. Carreau).

Image credit: ESA (Image by C. Carreau).

From Johan on what happens after the death of galaxies: “But what happens then? :)

Well, there are two ways to look at it. One is to look at what we physically think is going to happen and at the other (unfavored) possibilities:

  • Favored: the Universe will continue to expand and cool until — with the exception of quantum motion — all thermal properties drop to absolute zero. Total energy is still conserved, and space and time continue for an eternity.
  • Disfavored: dark energy will increase in strength, leading to either the Big Rip or a rejuvenated (high-energy) Universe.
  • Disfavored: the expansion will reverse itself, leading to a Big Crunch or potentially a cyclic model.
  • Disfavored: the quantum vacuum will tunnel into a more stable state, leading to an ultra-weak version of a new Big Bang, potentially producing some sort of matter and/or radiation.
Image credit: NASA.

Image credit: NASA.

Or, the second way it to ask about a more personal perspective: what ultimately happens to us when the Universe comes to this ultimate end? Lucky for you, if that was what you meant, that’s the subject of our latest Ask Ethan! Enjoy thinking about it either way.

Image credit: NASA, ESA, the Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA)-ESA/Hubble Collaboration and A. Evans (University of Virginia, Charlottesville/NRAO/Stony Brook University), K. Noll (STScI), and J. Westphal (Caltech).

Image credit: NASA, ESA, the Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA)-ESA/Hubble Collaboration and A. Evans (University of Virginia, Charlottesville/NRAO/Stony Brook University), K. Noll (STScI), and J. Westphal (Caltech).

From Randall Griffin on galaxy mergers vs. dark energy: “Not sure how to square this discussion about the gravitational effects causing the Milky Way and Andromeda to merge with what I thought was still the accepted truth based on red shifts that all the stars are receding from one another and the universe is likely to expand forever.”

This is the cosmic struggle that takes place between everything pretty much always: the expansion of the Universe that works to drive everything apart, and the influence of gravity, that works to attract all masses towards one another. Given any sort of initial configuration, you can imagine the three possibilities that either gravity wins and things merge, the expansion wins and things recede from one another forever, or you’re right on the brink: the border between the two, and so your recession speed asymptotes to zero but you never merge back together.

So now, we come to our local group, dominated by the Milky Way and Andromeda.

What you might not realize — and this is a common misunderstanding — is that this struggle doesn’t just take place on a cosmic scale, where (thanks to dark energy) the expansion will definitely win. In addition, this struggle occurs between all the various structures in the Universe, including between individual stars, galaxies, groups and clusters.

In our particular case, gravity will win when it comes to all the stars in our galaxy, all the galaxies in our local group, and possibly a few galaxies in some nearby groups, but also possibly not on that last one. We became gravitationally bound to Andromeda before dark energy achieved the relative strength it did in the Universe, and that’s why we’ll remain bound to it forever, with an eventual merger occurring some 4 billion years in the future.

Image credit: E A Bell et al, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 2015, via http://ift.tt/1MBCT42.

Image credit: E A Bell et al, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 2015, via http://ift.tt/1MBCT42.

From Michael Kelsey on whether life-on-Earth originated with Earth: “In fact, there *ARE* non-biological processes which fractionate isotopes (that is the technical term for what’s going on). For the specific case of 12C/13C fractionation, there are “several” non-biological process which can produce this signature (see, for example, the news article in Science magazine, http://ift.tt/1kkAJz9), including iron-based catalysis of hydrocarbons from carbon monoxide (http://ift.tt/1LITNQC, although the Wiki article does not mention isotopic fractionation).”

From MobiusKlein, referencing the original (journal) article: “There are considerable limitations of basing any inference regarding early Earth on a single zircon containing primary carbonaceous inclusions. Instead, we see this contribution as demonstrating the feasibility of perhaps the only approach that could lead to establishing a Hadean carbon isotope record.”

It’s important to note that this isn’t a slam-dunk; this is evidence that supports an earlier start to life-on-Earth than we’d previously had evidence for, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that this is organic carbon. As Sinisa Lazarek noted, we found molecular oxygen on the comet Rosetta is orbiting, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that there’s some sort of photosynthetic process happening on the comet to produce it.

It means that it’s a possibility, and perhaps even probable, but that like with all science, we need more evidence, and we need to be able to more definitively exclude alternative explanations. It’s a process, and we’re getting there, but we still have a ways to go.

Image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech.

Image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech.

From Michael Hutson on panspermia: “What advantage does the panspermia hypothesis have over a terrestrial origin of life for explaining abiogenesis?”

The trite answer is “none,” since at some point, you need to go from non-life to life, as that’s the literal definition of abiogenesis, and that had to happen at some point in the Universe. I suppose it might not matter much whether that happened on Earth or before Earth to some, but it matters a whole lot to me. You see, life as we know it here on Earth is complicated.

It takes a very large number of DNA base pairs to make what we know as even the simplest living organism, and that form of “life” has proven thus far uncreatable in laboratory conditions from raw ingredients. But perhaps, if we accept the hypothesis that there are far simpler “living” organisms than anything we’ve ever found on Earth, and that what we see today is far more advanced and evolved (and hence, more able to out-compete the simpler ones), that means that life is not only more ubiquitous than we presently think, but that all Earth-life as we know it is just one thread that’s branched off from a common tapestry that the entire galaxy or Universe shares when it comes to living creatures.

That’s the attractiveness, at least to me, of the panspermia hypothesis.

From Naked Bunny With A Whip on where humans get their energy from:

02This one was just too funny.

Image credit: Dreamstime.

Image credit: Dreamstime.

From Janko on the stability of matter against decay: “And could it decay into a hypothetical positive charged “dark matter particle” instead? Is it possible? Could this particle have a baryon number?”

This is pretty unlikely, and I’ll tell you why. Assuming you don’t necessarily mean electric charge or color charge, yes, it’s possible that a by-product of say, proton decay could be a dark matter particle. Neutrinos, for example, are by-products of most theoretical pathways of proton decay, they have mass (and so, therefore, are a form of dark matter), and they have a weak hypercharge. But the dark matter that it would decay into wouldn’t in any realistic model have very much to do with the dark matter that dominates our Universe, which must be cold and have an extremely small (much smaller than neutrinos, for example) interaction cross-section.

The baryon number question is tricky, and while Michael Kelsey gave a great answer:

“DM almost certainly can’t have baryon number. If it did, then it would be included in our calculations of the photon/baryon ratio after the hot Big Bang. But it isn’t (which is one of the lines of evidence for the 5-to-1 discrepancy!).

Having said that, most models of baryogenesis introduce additional symmetries to the Standard Model which lead to both lepton (L) non-conservation and baryon (B) non-conservation, but leaves L-B as a conserved quantity. If the DM is implicated in baryogenesis (as some models propose), then it could carry L-B as a good quantum number.”

I’ll point out that there are plenty of theoretical particles that carry both lepton and baryon number (leptoquarks, the X and Y bosons from Grand Unified Theories), but they are generally both high-mass, and that the low-mass ones (like the light quarks) all have something else along with them: a color charge. Is it possible to have baryon number without a QCD interaction? Maybe, but if so, it’s nothing we have any evidence for, nor a successful theoretical framework for.

Image credit: Wikimedia Commons users Alchemist-hp (http://ift.tt/1bcWzg0) + Richard Bartz with focus stack.

Image credit: Wikimedia Commons users Alchemist-hp (http://ift.tt/1bcWzg0) + Richard Bartz with focus stack.

And finally, one last quickie from Michael Hutson: “Just what is the longest decay time we’ve experimentally observed?”

For any isotope of an element, as stated by other commenters, we’ve observed Tellurium-128. For the most stable isotope of any element, that would be Bismuth (shown above). Bismuth is interesting — as we’ve written about before — in that we once thought it was the heaviest stable element in the Universe. If you have a periodic table from about 2002 or earlier, it will tell you that Bismuth, at element 83, is the heaviest non-radioactive element. But if your periodic table was made from around 2003 or onwards, it says that Lead, element 82, is the heaviest non-radioactive element, because Bismuth decays with a half-life of 1.9 × 10^19 years. This is over a billion times as large as the present age of the Universe!

So what does this mean? It likely means that of the isotopes and elements we’ve observed, there are almost certainly a great many that we’ve observed to be stable that are not truly stable on long enough timescales. How many elements are radioactive given 10^50 years? Or 10^100, or 10^1000? All of them? At some level, there’s only so much we can learn with the Universe we have available to us, and this avenue of taking large collections of atoms and looking for a decay has its own limitations. The limit of what we’ve ever observed is just the beginning of what’s out there.

Thanks for a great week, and may your Halloween be fantastic!



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1PceQNH

2015: A Very Bad Year for the Global Warming Policy Foundation

This is a re-post from tamino at Open Mind

Desperate to hold on to the “pause” that never happened in global warming, David Whitehose has penned a piece for the Global Warming Policy Foundation(GWPF). What he really shows is that it’s a very bad year indeed for the GWPF.

He objects to this graph:

Noaa-1

It shows global temperature year-to-date (using data from NOAA) for 2015 (that’s the one way at the top) compared to the same for the next six hottest years on record. David Whitehouse doesn’t like that — because it shows, in graphic terms, how much hotter this year has been than its predecessor, and just how likely it is that 2015 will be the new #1 hottest. A fact which even David Whitehouse admits.

His “argument” is that the “pause” (the one that never happened) hasn’t ended, mainly because not every month this year so far has been the hottest on record. To make that argument, he switches from NOAA data to NASA data. He also points out that only 5 of 9 months (so far this year) have been hotter than the same month last year (he doesn’t bother with “by how much”). He also blames the record-breaking year-to-date (in NOAA and NASA data, and HadCRUT4 to boot) on the current el Nino. It’s true that el Nino years tend to be hotter … which is why 1998 was so hot, and why deniers usually start their “no warming since” graphs with 1998. Finally, he emphasizes that there’s uncertainty in global temperature, of about 0.1 deg.C.

Which is funny, because when deniers were in “full pause mode” (the pause that never happened) they didn’t talk about uncertainty. And yes, they started their “pause” meme with 1998 and because of 1998 being such a hot year.

What’s also funny is the “not the hottest month every month” argument. Suppose you played a baseball game — nine innings — and in the first inning you only scored th 2nd-most runs in league first-inning history, in the second inning you only scored the 2nd-most runs in league second-inning history, etc. etc. After nine innings, you’ve scored the most total runs in one game in league history. But that’s worthless; I guess, according to David Whitehouse, your offensive scoring is in a “pause” (you know, the one that never happened).

What’s not funny is David Whitehouse simply denying the truth:


Despite this extensive research taking place Peter Hannam continues in his article with a very out-of-date comment. “For years, climate change sceptics relied on a spike in global temperatures that occurred during the monster 1997-98 El Nino to say the world had stopped warming because later years struggled to set a higher mark even as greenhouse gas emissions continued to rise.” This myth has been addressed so many times. The year 1998 and its strong El Nino has nothing to do with the pause. Neither “climate sceptics” nor climate scientists would fall for such an obvious aspect of the data, but it seems journalists still do!

Au contraire. Fake skeptics (a.k.a. deniers, a.k.a. climate anti-vaxxers) exploit the 1998 el Nino, have for years. And climate “skeptics” fall for it all the time.

As for the whole el Nino thing, it looks like we’ve got a strong one going on right now. The last time we had such a big one was 1998. Were those years so hot onlybecause of the el Nino? Let’s compare the two directly (2015 isn’t complete, so I’ve plotted year-to-date):

noaa

Both of the big el Nino years were hotter than nearby years. But they weren’t just hot because of el Nino, they were hot because of global warming. That’s why this year is so much hotter than the 1998 monster el Nino. That’s why 2005, 2007, 2010, 2014 all broke the 1998 record in spite of 1998 being a monsterel Nino. Because there is no “pause.” It never happened.

You can see the same thing with NASA data (again, 2015 is year-to-date):

nasa

He closes with this utterly nonsensical non-sequitur:


What the data is showing us is that over the past 15 years or so there has been little underlying change with El Ninos elevating the temperature a little and La Ninas reducing them. Is what is happening to global annual average surface temperatures all that surprising?

Surprising? Of course not. Because the globe is warming. Because of us. As for the “pause” that David Whitehouse and the GWPF so desperately cling to — it never happened.

Help us do science! we’ve teamed up with researcher Paige Brown Jarreau to create a survey of Skeptical Science readers. By participating, you’ll be helping me improve SkS and contributing to SCIENCE on blog readership. You will also get FREE science art from Paige's Photography for participating, as well as a chance to win a t-shirt and other perks! It should only take 10-15 minutes to complete. You can find the survey here: http://bit.ly/mysciblogreaders. For completing the survey, readers will be entered into a drawing for a $50.00 Amazon gift card, as well as for other prizes (i.e. t-shirts). 



from Skeptical Science http://ift.tt/1LIIM1z

This is a re-post from tamino at Open Mind

Desperate to hold on to the “pause” that never happened in global warming, David Whitehose has penned a piece for the Global Warming Policy Foundation(GWPF). What he really shows is that it’s a very bad year indeed for the GWPF.

He objects to this graph:

Noaa-1

It shows global temperature year-to-date (using data from NOAA) for 2015 (that’s the one way at the top) compared to the same for the next six hottest years on record. David Whitehouse doesn’t like that — because it shows, in graphic terms, how much hotter this year has been than its predecessor, and just how likely it is that 2015 will be the new #1 hottest. A fact which even David Whitehouse admits.

His “argument” is that the “pause” (the one that never happened) hasn’t ended, mainly because not every month this year so far has been the hottest on record. To make that argument, he switches from NOAA data to NASA data. He also points out that only 5 of 9 months (so far this year) have been hotter than the same month last year (he doesn’t bother with “by how much”). He also blames the record-breaking year-to-date (in NOAA and NASA data, and HadCRUT4 to boot) on the current el Nino. It’s true that el Nino years tend to be hotter … which is why 1998 was so hot, and why deniers usually start their “no warming since” graphs with 1998. Finally, he emphasizes that there’s uncertainty in global temperature, of about 0.1 deg.C.

Which is funny, because when deniers were in “full pause mode” (the pause that never happened) they didn’t talk about uncertainty. And yes, they started their “pause” meme with 1998 and because of 1998 being such a hot year.

What’s also funny is the “not the hottest month every month” argument. Suppose you played a baseball game — nine innings — and in the first inning you only scored th 2nd-most runs in league first-inning history, in the second inning you only scored the 2nd-most runs in league second-inning history, etc. etc. After nine innings, you’ve scored the most total runs in one game in league history. But that’s worthless; I guess, according to David Whitehouse, your offensive scoring is in a “pause” (you know, the one that never happened).

What’s not funny is David Whitehouse simply denying the truth:


Despite this extensive research taking place Peter Hannam continues in his article with a very out-of-date comment. “For years, climate change sceptics relied on a spike in global temperatures that occurred during the monster 1997-98 El Nino to say the world had stopped warming because later years struggled to set a higher mark even as greenhouse gas emissions continued to rise.” This myth has been addressed so many times. The year 1998 and its strong El Nino has nothing to do with the pause. Neither “climate sceptics” nor climate scientists would fall for such an obvious aspect of the data, but it seems journalists still do!

Au contraire. Fake skeptics (a.k.a. deniers, a.k.a. climate anti-vaxxers) exploit the 1998 el Nino, have for years. And climate “skeptics” fall for it all the time.

As for the whole el Nino thing, it looks like we’ve got a strong one going on right now. The last time we had such a big one was 1998. Were those years so hot onlybecause of the el Nino? Let’s compare the two directly (2015 isn’t complete, so I’ve plotted year-to-date):

noaa

Both of the big el Nino years were hotter than nearby years. But they weren’t just hot because of el Nino, they were hot because of global warming. That’s why this year is so much hotter than the 1998 monster el Nino. That’s why 2005, 2007, 2010, 2014 all broke the 1998 record in spite of 1998 being a monsterel Nino. Because there is no “pause.” It never happened.

You can see the same thing with NASA data (again, 2015 is year-to-date):

nasa

He closes with this utterly nonsensical non-sequitur:


What the data is showing us is that over the past 15 years or so there has been little underlying change with El Ninos elevating the temperature a little and La Ninas reducing them. Is what is happening to global annual average surface temperatures all that surprising?

Surprising? Of course not. Because the globe is warming. Because of us. As for the “pause” that David Whitehouse and the GWPF so desperately cling to — it never happened.

Help us do science! we’ve teamed up with researcher Paige Brown Jarreau to create a survey of Skeptical Science readers. By participating, you’ll be helping me improve SkS and contributing to SCIENCE on blog readership. You will also get FREE science art from Paige's Photography for participating, as well as a chance to win a t-shirt and other perks! It should only take 10-15 minutes to complete. You can find the survey here: http://bit.ly/mysciblogreaders. For completing the survey, readers will be entered into a drawing for a $50.00 Amazon gift card, as well as for other prizes (i.e. t-shirts). 



from Skeptical Science http://ift.tt/1LIIM1z

2015 SkS Weekly News Roundup #44

A chronological listing of the news articles posted on the Skeptical Science Facebook page during the past week.

Sun, Oct 25

Mon, Oct 26

Tue, Oct 27

Wed, Oct 28

Thu, Oct 29

Fri, Oct 30

Sat, Oct 31



from Skeptical Science http://ift.tt/1Pc1YHt

A chronological listing of the news articles posted on the Skeptical Science Facebook page during the past week.

Sun, Oct 25

Mon, Oct 26

Tue, Oct 27

Wed, Oct 28

Thu, Oct 29

Fri, Oct 30

Sat, Oct 31



from Skeptical Science http://ift.tt/1Pc1YHt

Hope your Halloween is a 'real' scream

Janet Leigh belts one out during the famous shower scene in "Psycho."

Ben Guarino writes about the mysteries of screaming for Inverse. Below is an excerpt:

"We scream when we're excited or happy; we scream when we're fearful or in pain; we scream when we are exasperated; we scream when we're charging into battle; we scream during sex. But we rarely stop to wonder what those screams, even the ones that erupt from us, signify or if they can be differentiated. Emory University psychologist Harold Gouzoules thinks in those terms, but despite being probably the world's foremost expert on screaming, he doesn't speak in absolutes. For decades, Gouzoules studied screams in macaques and other nonhuman primates. He's only worked with Homo sapiens for three years and answers to even the most basic research questions remain elusive."

Read Guarino's interview with Gouzoules in Inverse.

Related:
The psychology of screams



from eScienceCommons http://ift.tt/1PWzGm3
Janet Leigh belts one out during the famous shower scene in "Psycho."

Ben Guarino writes about the mysteries of screaming for Inverse. Below is an excerpt:

"We scream when we're excited or happy; we scream when we're fearful or in pain; we scream when we are exasperated; we scream when we're charging into battle; we scream during sex. But we rarely stop to wonder what those screams, even the ones that erupt from us, signify or if they can be differentiated. Emory University psychologist Harold Gouzoules thinks in those terms, but despite being probably the world's foremost expert on screaming, he doesn't speak in absolutes. For decades, Gouzoules studied screams in macaques and other nonhuman primates. He's only worked with Homo sapiens for three years and answers to even the most basic research questions remain elusive."

Read Guarino's interview with Gouzoules in Inverse.

Related:
The psychology of screams



from eScienceCommons http://ift.tt/1PWzGm3

Ask Ethan #112: The very, very end of the Universe (Synopsis) [Starts With A Bang]

“End? No, the journey doesn’t end here. Death is just another path, one that we all must take. The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all turns to silver glass, and then you see it.” –J.R.R. Tolkien

There’s a realization we all face at some point in our lives: that not only are we going to someday have our lives come to an end, but that everything that exists in the Universe will cease to be in its current form. All life will wither away, the last stars will burn out, the galaxies themselves will be driven apart from one another, the individual stars and planets will be ejected, and even the black holes left over will decay away into pure, cold radiation.

Image credit: XMM-Newton, ESA, NASA.

Image credit: XMM-Newton, ESA, NASA.

When all this passes away, what will be left? The fabric of space and time itself, which contains the entire Universe, and all the energy that’s ever been a part of it. None of that goes away, and all of it has the cosmic memory of whatever you did imprinted on it forever.

Image credit: Chris Kotsiopoulos, via http://ift.tt/1jZlOud.

Image credit: Chris Kotsiopoulos, via http://ift.tt/1jZlOud.

Go read the whole story on the deepest “Ask Ethan” ever tackled!



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1MosCYl

“End? No, the journey doesn’t end here. Death is just another path, one that we all must take. The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all turns to silver glass, and then you see it.” –J.R.R. Tolkien

There’s a realization we all face at some point in our lives: that not only are we going to someday have our lives come to an end, but that everything that exists in the Universe will cease to be in its current form. All life will wither away, the last stars will burn out, the galaxies themselves will be driven apart from one another, the individual stars and planets will be ejected, and even the black holes left over will decay away into pure, cold radiation.

Image credit: XMM-Newton, ESA, NASA.

Image credit: XMM-Newton, ESA, NASA.

When all this passes away, what will be left? The fabric of space and time itself, which contains the entire Universe, and all the energy that’s ever been a part of it. None of that goes away, and all of it has the cosmic memory of whatever you did imprinted on it forever.

Image credit: Chris Kotsiopoulos, via http://ift.tt/1jZlOud.

Image credit: Chris Kotsiopoulos, via http://ift.tt/1jZlOud.

Go read the whole story on the deepest “Ask Ethan” ever tackled!



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1MosCYl

October Pieces Of My Mind #2 [Aardvarchaeology]

Birger Jarlsgatan 11, Stockholm

Birger Jarlsgatan 11, Stockholm

  • Nice ad here on my blog for once. It does have a pretty woman in it, but she’s not a white Russian mail-order girlfriend. She’s a black potential student on the course “Swedish for programmers”.
  • Movie: Taikon. Documentary about Swedish novelist and Roma activist Katarina Taikon. Grade: Pass With Distinction.
  • The guy who installed the wiring for our new kitchen appliances wasn’t forced on us by some dictatorial decree. He was an elect rician.
  • Dad brag: guess whose kid teaches HTML pro bono to disadvantaged 11-y-os in his spare time!
  • Dropped off this year’s bones from Stensö Castle with Rudolf the Bone Man.
  • Casa Rundkvist Chou now has a Stålenhag. And pretty much an original too since the man paints digitally.
  • Me and wife and Jrette went out and sat back on lawn chairs to look for meteors. I saw three, all in Cassiopeia which was straight overhead.
  • The New Horizons probe at Pluto used bog-standard JPG compression for the first batch of images it sent back. Now it’s sending the image files with lossless compression.
  • Great fake Scandinavian surnames in science fiction: Gorson (in Edmondson), Sverensen (in Hogan), and best of all, SAKNUSSEMM (in Verne).
  • Last week Sweden was shaken by a case of racially motivated mass murder in a school. A 21-y-o Neo-Nazi wrote a suicide letter, took the heaviest weaponry he could get hold of, walked into a school in Trollhättan and killed as many foreign-complexioned people as he could. He was then shot by the police and died in hospital. This being Sweden, not a country with insanely lax gun laws, the heaviest weapon the murderer could acquire was a sword. And he killed only two people: a 20-y-o special needs teacher and a 15-y-o pupil, both of whom were trying to disarm him.
  • Finally identified the beautiful song I’ve been hearing on the plane twice a week for two months. It’s Beck’s “Morning”.
  • No Deezer. The fact that I like Teenage Fanclub does not mean that you should play me the Verve, Oasis, REM or feckin’ No Doubt.
  • Annoyed by cups falling over in our new dishwasher, I just struck the black metal “I am shouting at the ceiling and grabbing an enormous pair of balls” pose. My darkly grim guitarist brother tells me he and his brethren prefer to call it the ”invisible oranges” pose.
Magpie morning conference

Magpie morning conference



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1PbLEqd
Birger Jarlsgatan 11, Stockholm

Birger Jarlsgatan 11, Stockholm

  • Nice ad here on my blog for once. It does have a pretty woman in it, but she’s not a white Russian mail-order girlfriend. She’s a black potential student on the course “Swedish for programmers”.
  • Movie: Taikon. Documentary about Swedish novelist and Roma activist Katarina Taikon. Grade: Pass With Distinction.
  • The guy who installed the wiring for our new kitchen appliances wasn’t forced on us by some dictatorial decree. He was an elect rician.
  • Dad brag: guess whose kid teaches HTML pro bono to disadvantaged 11-y-os in his spare time!
  • Dropped off this year’s bones from Stensö Castle with Rudolf the Bone Man.
  • Casa Rundkvist Chou now has a Stålenhag. And pretty much an original too since the man paints digitally.
  • Me and wife and Jrette went out and sat back on lawn chairs to look for meteors. I saw three, all in Cassiopeia which was straight overhead.
  • The New Horizons probe at Pluto used bog-standard JPG compression for the first batch of images it sent back. Now it’s sending the image files with lossless compression.
  • Great fake Scandinavian surnames in science fiction: Gorson (in Edmondson), Sverensen (in Hogan), and best of all, SAKNUSSEMM (in Verne).
  • Last week Sweden was shaken by a case of racially motivated mass murder in a school. A 21-y-o Neo-Nazi wrote a suicide letter, took the heaviest weaponry he could get hold of, walked into a school in Trollhättan and killed as many foreign-complexioned people as he could. He was then shot by the police and died in hospital. This being Sweden, not a country with insanely lax gun laws, the heaviest weapon the murderer could acquire was a sword. And he killed only two people: a 20-y-o special needs teacher and a 15-y-o pupil, both of whom were trying to disarm him.
  • Finally identified the beautiful song I’ve been hearing on the plane twice a week for two months. It’s Beck’s “Morning”.
  • No Deezer. The fact that I like Teenage Fanclub does not mean that you should play me the Verve, Oasis, REM or feckin’ No Doubt.
  • Annoyed by cups falling over in our new dishwasher, I just struck the black metal “I am shouting at the ceiling and grabbing an enormous pair of balls” pose. My darkly grim guitarist brother tells me he and his brethren prefer to call it the ”invisible oranges” pose.
Magpie morning conference

Magpie morning conference



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1PbLEqd

News digest – meat week, late diagnosis, herpes cancer treatment and…how many things cause cancer?

BaconHero
  • It was hard to miss this week’s top story as the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) announced that processed meat is a ‘definite’ cause of cancer. The media went crazy, but missed the real meat of the story – that there’s a difference between the strength of the evidence and the size of the risk. We’ve got it covered in this blog post.
  • Our latest stats showed that there is ‘unacceptable’ variation across England in the stage at which cancers are being diagnosed. The BBC, Guardian and Mail Online were among the many media outlets to cover the figures.
  • A small UK clinical trial has found that a drug developed to target inherited gene faults could benefit some men whose prostate cancer has spread. We covered this, as did the BBC and NHS Choices.
  • US scientists found that one in 10 stomach cancers appear to carry a genetic ‘fingerprint’ that could provide clues as to the most effective course of treatment. Our news report has the details.
  • Lung cancer experts in Wales claimed there are ‘unacceptable’ differences in patient care across the country. The BBC has more.

Number of the week

116

The number of ‘definite’ causes of cancer on IARC’s list, including processed meat.

  • The Independent featured genetically engineered veg that produce particular chemicals on an industrial scale. Still doesn’t mean these super tomatoes can beat cancer though.
  • An experimental cancer therapy using a modified form of the herpes virus received US approval for treating people with melanoma whose tumours can’t be removed through surgery. The Guardian covered this, and we’ve blogged about the treatment before.
  • When is a breakthrough not a breakthrough? US research questioned the language that is sometimes used to describe new cancer drugs, and NPR has the details.
  • The Mirror covered US research claiming that low doses of chemicals called parabens might be linked to breast cancer. But based on all the available research, there’s no convincing evidence that these chemicals do cause cancer.
  • A US laboratory study found that a specialised form of immunotherapy could prove effective in patients with pancreatic cancer. Our news report has the details.

And finally

Nick



from Cancer Research UK - Science blog http://ift.tt/1khXymz
BaconHero
  • It was hard to miss this week’s top story as the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) announced that processed meat is a ‘definite’ cause of cancer. The media went crazy, but missed the real meat of the story – that there’s a difference between the strength of the evidence and the size of the risk. We’ve got it covered in this blog post.
  • Our latest stats showed that there is ‘unacceptable’ variation across England in the stage at which cancers are being diagnosed. The BBC, Guardian and Mail Online were among the many media outlets to cover the figures.
  • A small UK clinical trial has found that a drug developed to target inherited gene faults could benefit some men whose prostate cancer has spread. We covered this, as did the BBC and NHS Choices.
  • US scientists found that one in 10 stomach cancers appear to carry a genetic ‘fingerprint’ that could provide clues as to the most effective course of treatment. Our news report has the details.
  • Lung cancer experts in Wales claimed there are ‘unacceptable’ differences in patient care across the country. The BBC has more.

Number of the week

116

The number of ‘definite’ causes of cancer on IARC’s list, including processed meat.

  • The Independent featured genetically engineered veg that produce particular chemicals on an industrial scale. Still doesn’t mean these super tomatoes can beat cancer though.
  • An experimental cancer therapy using a modified form of the herpes virus received US approval for treating people with melanoma whose tumours can’t be removed through surgery. The Guardian covered this, and we’ve blogged about the treatment before.
  • When is a breakthrough not a breakthrough? US research questioned the language that is sometimes used to describe new cancer drugs, and NPR has the details.
  • The Mirror covered US research claiming that low doses of chemicals called parabens might be linked to breast cancer. But based on all the available research, there’s no convincing evidence that these chemicals do cause cancer.
  • A US laboratory study found that a specialised form of immunotherapy could prove effective in patients with pancreatic cancer. Our news report has the details.

And finally

Nick



from Cancer Research UK - Science blog http://ift.tt/1khXymz

Spooky selfie, 3 planets, dead satellite

Spooky selfie - Venus, Jupiter and Mars - and a dead satellite posted at EarthSky Facebook by EarthSky by Tom Wildoner of LeisurelyScientist.com

Spooky selfie – the planetary trio Venus, Jupiter and Mars – and a dead satellite posted at EarthSky Facebook by EarthSky by Tom Wildoner of LeisurelyScientist.com

Our friend Tom Wildoner wrote at his blog:

What do a spooky-looking selfie, three planets and a dead satellite have in common? They are all in this photo from October 26, 2015. I thought I would try a selfie on Monday morning using my Canon 6D and Lensbaby Fisheye lens (15 seconds at ISO 3200), after examining the photo I noticed a small streak in the background that I later identified (using Starry Night Pro software) as satellite ADEOS II, which died in orbit in 2003 after the solar panels failed.

Don’t miss the Venus-Mars conjunction on November 3!



from EarthSky http://ift.tt/1jYHlDg
Spooky selfie - Venus, Jupiter and Mars - and a dead satellite posted at EarthSky Facebook by EarthSky by Tom Wildoner of LeisurelyScientist.com

Spooky selfie – the planetary trio Venus, Jupiter and Mars – and a dead satellite posted at EarthSky Facebook by EarthSky by Tom Wildoner of LeisurelyScientist.com

Our friend Tom Wildoner wrote at his blog:

What do a spooky-looking selfie, three planets and a dead satellite have in common? They are all in this photo from October 26, 2015. I thought I would try a selfie on Monday morning using my Canon 6D and Lensbaby Fisheye lens (15 seconds at ISO 3200), after examining the photo I noticed a small streak in the background that I later identified (using Starry Night Pro software) as satellite ADEOS II, which died in orbit in 2003 after the solar panels failed.

Don’t miss the Venus-Mars conjunction on November 3!



from EarthSky http://ift.tt/1jYHlDg

Halloween ghost of the summer sun

Every Halloween – and a few days before and after – the brilliant star Arcturus sets at the same time and on the same spot on the west-northwest horizon as the summer sun. What’s more, this star rises at the same time and at the same place on the east-northeast horizon as the sun does during the dog days of summer.

At northerly latitudes, Arcturus sets in the west after sunset and rises in the east before sunrise

However, if you live in the Southern Hemisphere, you can’t see Arcturus right now. South of the equator, Arcturus sets at the same time and on the same place on the horizon as the winter sun. In other words, Arcturus sets before the sun and rises after the sun at southerly latitudes at this time of year.

EarthSky lunar calendars are cool! They make great gifts. Order now. Supplies limited.

Cover of 'Star Arcturus, ghost of summer sun' coloring book

In the Northern Hemisphere – around Halloween – this brilliant pumpkin-colored star playacts as the ghost of the summer sun.

At mid-northern latitudes, Arcturus now sets about 2 hours after sunset and rises about 2 hours before sunrise.

By watching this star in the October evening chill, you can envision the absent summer sun radiating its extra hours of sunlight. Not till after dark does this star set, an echo of long summer afternoons. Similarly, Arcturus rises in the east before dawn, a phantom reminder of early morning daybreaks.

You can verify that you’re looking at Arcturus once the Big Dipper comes out. Its handle always points to Arcturus.

By the way, if you live as far north as Barrow, Alaska, the star Arcturus shines all night long, mimicking the midnight sun of summer.

Donate: Your support means the world to us

Halloween derived from ancient Celtic cross-quarter day



from EarthSky http://ift.tt/1W6SzGH

Every Halloween – and a few days before and after – the brilliant star Arcturus sets at the same time and on the same spot on the west-northwest horizon as the summer sun. What’s more, this star rises at the same time and at the same place on the east-northeast horizon as the sun does during the dog days of summer.

At northerly latitudes, Arcturus sets in the west after sunset and rises in the east before sunrise

However, if you live in the Southern Hemisphere, you can’t see Arcturus right now. South of the equator, Arcturus sets at the same time and on the same place on the horizon as the winter sun. In other words, Arcturus sets before the sun and rises after the sun at southerly latitudes at this time of year.

EarthSky lunar calendars are cool! They make great gifts. Order now. Supplies limited.

Cover of 'Star Arcturus, ghost of summer sun' coloring book

In the Northern Hemisphere – around Halloween – this brilliant pumpkin-colored star playacts as the ghost of the summer sun.

At mid-northern latitudes, Arcturus now sets about 2 hours after sunset and rises about 2 hours before sunrise.

By watching this star in the October evening chill, you can envision the absent summer sun radiating its extra hours of sunlight. Not till after dark does this star set, an echo of long summer afternoons. Similarly, Arcturus rises in the east before dawn, a phantom reminder of early morning daybreaks.

You can verify that you’re looking at Arcturus once the Big Dipper comes out. Its handle always points to Arcturus.

By the way, if you live as far north as Barrow, Alaska, the star Arcturus shines all night long, mimicking the midnight sun of summer.

Donate: Your support means the world to us

Halloween derived from ancient Celtic cross-quarter day



from EarthSky http://ift.tt/1W6SzGH

The Republican Debate [EvolutionBlog]

Since I didn’t have any grading this time, and since Republicans are harder to listen to than Democrats (and remember, I used to spend hours at a time listening to Creationists), I couldn’t bring myself to watch the entirety of the recent Republican debate. I kept flipping back and forth between it and game two of the World Series (which, as a Mets fan, was also hard to watch.) But I saw enough of it to form a few impressions.

The first is that the CNBC folks absolutely disgraced themselves. They all need to go home and resign. I actually briefly cheered Ted Cruz, for heaven’s sake, when he called them out on the utter stupidity of their questions. The problem wasn’t just the questions themselves, which were mostly foolish and petty. It was that, having decided to go that route, the moderators were then entirely unprepared when the candidates pushed back.

Television political pundits tend to be entirely out of their depth when discussing anything other than horse race questions. Their favorite activity is making stuff up about what “the American people” are thinking. Mostly they don’t know anything about anything, which is why they are reticent about having serious discussions about anything. If you want to see pundits who know what they’re talking about, you have to turn to the sports channels.

Of course, Cruz then went way overboard when he suggested that the questions at the Democratic debate were softballs. That’s just nonsense. Anderson Cooper spent most of the evening positively snarling at Hillary Clinton. It’s just that Clinton handled everything so smoothly and effortlessly that it was easy to think she was being served up softballs.

Anyway, that brings us to the second point. It is now perfectly acceptable in Republican politics to tell bald-faced lies. Bald-faced. Kevin Drum rounds up just a few examples. Of course, most people have consciences that prevent them from being quite so mendacious as the current crop of Republican candidates. But the candidates figure that far more people will see the big, confident lie than will ever see the fact check, so they might as well just go for it.

The final point is that Jeb Bush needs to get out of the race. If this were an MMA fight, the official would have stepped in to stop it by now. Basically, Jeb thought that he was the inevitable nominee–I mean, Republican primary voters wouldn’t really vote for one of the clown car candidates, would they?–and that he would only have to deal with a relatively civilized campaign against Hillary Clinton. It’s hard to feel too sorry for him, though. The Bush family gave us Willie Horton, the pledge of allegiance, and the swift boaters after all.

End of rant. I feel better now. If we must have a Republican president (and I still think Clinton is likely to win in the end), then I really hope it’s Trump.



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1isKGsJ

Since I didn’t have any grading this time, and since Republicans are harder to listen to than Democrats (and remember, I used to spend hours at a time listening to Creationists), I couldn’t bring myself to watch the entirety of the recent Republican debate. I kept flipping back and forth between it and game two of the World Series (which, as a Mets fan, was also hard to watch.) But I saw enough of it to form a few impressions.

The first is that the CNBC folks absolutely disgraced themselves. They all need to go home and resign. I actually briefly cheered Ted Cruz, for heaven’s sake, when he called them out on the utter stupidity of their questions. The problem wasn’t just the questions themselves, which were mostly foolish and petty. It was that, having decided to go that route, the moderators were then entirely unprepared when the candidates pushed back.

Television political pundits tend to be entirely out of their depth when discussing anything other than horse race questions. Their favorite activity is making stuff up about what “the American people” are thinking. Mostly they don’t know anything about anything, which is why they are reticent about having serious discussions about anything. If you want to see pundits who know what they’re talking about, you have to turn to the sports channels.

Of course, Cruz then went way overboard when he suggested that the questions at the Democratic debate were softballs. That’s just nonsense. Anderson Cooper spent most of the evening positively snarling at Hillary Clinton. It’s just that Clinton handled everything so smoothly and effortlessly that it was easy to think she was being served up softballs.

Anyway, that brings us to the second point. It is now perfectly acceptable in Republican politics to tell bald-faced lies. Bald-faced. Kevin Drum rounds up just a few examples. Of course, most people have consciences that prevent them from being quite so mendacious as the current crop of Republican candidates. But the candidates figure that far more people will see the big, confident lie than will ever see the fact check, so they might as well just go for it.

The final point is that Jeb Bush needs to get out of the race. If this were an MMA fight, the official would have stepped in to stop it by now. Basically, Jeb thought that he was the inevitable nominee–I mean, Republican primary voters wouldn’t really vote for one of the clown car candidates, would they?–and that he would only have to deal with a relatively civilized campaign against Hillary Clinton. It’s hard to feel too sorry for him, though. The Bush family gave us Willie Horton, the pledge of allegiance, and the swift boaters after all.

End of rant. I feel better now. If we must have a Republican president (and I still think Clinton is likely to win in the end), then I really hope it’s Trump.



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1isKGsJ

060/366: Falling [Uncertain Principles]

This is basically the shot I was trying to get yesterday when I ended up settling for an evil squirrel: a leaf in mid-fall.

Falling leaf in late October.

Falling leaf in late October.

This is, of course, damnably difficult to get, as it’s impossible to guess when a specific leaf will drop, and if you throw them up into the air, they don’t stay airborne long enough to bring the camera up and focus it. And, you know, I could recruit somebody to toss leaves in the air for me, but I’m not sure that would make me feel any less a dumbass than standing in the yard with my camera staring up at the maple over the driveway.

It’s not quite perfect– there’s a lens-flare sort of thing arcing across the middle, because the Sun is just out of the frame to the upper right. But it’s pretty close, and I got it without cheating, so that feels good.

(Of course, later in the day, I was out in the yard with SteelyKid and The Pip, flinging rakefuls of leaves up into the air so they could run around in mini leaf tornados, which would’ve been a cool shot, too…)



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1isgE8x

This is basically the shot I was trying to get yesterday when I ended up settling for an evil squirrel: a leaf in mid-fall.

Falling leaf in late October.

Falling leaf in late October.

This is, of course, damnably difficult to get, as it’s impossible to guess when a specific leaf will drop, and if you throw them up into the air, they don’t stay airborne long enough to bring the camera up and focus it. And, you know, I could recruit somebody to toss leaves in the air for me, but I’m not sure that would make me feel any less a dumbass than standing in the yard with my camera staring up at the maple over the driveway.

It’s not quite perfect– there’s a lens-flare sort of thing arcing across the middle, because the Sun is just out of the frame to the upper right. But it’s pretty close, and I got it without cheating, so that feels good.

(Of course, later in the day, I was out in the yard with SteelyKid and The Pip, flinging rakefuls of leaves up into the air so they could run around in mini leaf tornados, which would’ve been a cool shot, too…)



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1isgE8x

Texas Flooding [Greg Laden's Blog]

I don’t have anything to say right now about the flooding in Texas. But I am watching, and learning, and paying attention to various sources.

But, for now, you’ve got to see this:



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1REl87V

I don’t have anything to say right now about the flooding in Texas. But I am watching, and learning, and paying attention to various sources.

But, for now, you’ve got to see this:



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1REl87V

Spooooky bats [Life Lines]

This video about vampire bats still fascinates me!



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1WmjsGN

This video about vampire bats still fascinates me!



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1WmjsGN

ESA sponsors WT1190F observations

Editor's note: We received word late this afternoon that ESA's Space Situational Awareness (SSA) Programme office will sponsor a European team to join an airborne observation campaign to track and observe the reentry of WT1190F, an unidentified object thought to be a discarded rocket body. It is forecast to enter Earth's atmosphere high above the Indian Ocean on 13 November. Here is a short update from Dr Stefan Löhle, lead scientist on the University of Stuttgart team that will conduct the observations.

Two researchers from the High Enthalpy Flow Diagnostics Group (HEFDiG), Institute of Space Systems, University of Stuttgart, Germany, will participate in an airborne observation campaign to track and record the reentry of the unknown object dubbed WTF1190F, expected to reenter over the Indian Ocean at 06:19 GMT (11:49 local; 07:19 CET) on 13 November 2015.

Dr Stefan Löhle and Dr Fabian Zander, both experienced researchers in optical diagnostics of aero-thermodynamic phenomena, will deploy their instruments on board an aircraft that will observe WTF1190F reentry. ESA is sponsoring this mission, which will complement other space- and ground-based observation efforts and is expected to provide valuable data on reentry physics.

WT1190F seen from ground. The object was observed by B. Bolin, R. Jedicke and M. Micheli from the University of Arizona in their Catalina Sky Survey Program.

WT1190F seen from ground. The object was observed by B. Bolin, R. Jedicke and M. Micheli from the University of Arizona in their Catalina Sky
Survey Program.

Object WTF1190F was observed by B. Bolin, R. Jedicke and M. Micheli via the University of Arizona's Catalina Sky Survey Program (red arrow in the image).

It is not yet known what the object is, exactly. From its behaviour, it can be surmised that, due to its low density, it is possibly hollow and thus probably a man-made piece of space junk. The size is approximately 2 m. From analysis performed so far, it is thought that object will enter (i.e. re-enter) the Earth's atmosphere on 13 November 2015, around mid-day, with an entry velocity of about 11 km/s. The entry interface angle is predicted to be 30°.

Thus, a very steep, high-speed entry is expected, so that most probably the object will be destroyed in the upper atmospheric layers.

The interest in observing such objects is, on the one hand, that this could serve as a 'test case' for future asteroid entries, and, on the other hand, the data collected can be used to improve our understanding of space debris behavior.

In the past, the University of Stuttgart's HEFDiG group has participated in the airborne observations of Hayabusa (2010) and ESA's ATV-1 (2008). Most recently, Stefan was the science team lead in the mission to observe the re-entry of the last ATV, Georges Lemaître, which was cancelled due to technical issues and which was a joint ESA-NASA activity.

The Gulfstream 450 business jet to be deployed for the observation. Image courtesy M. Shawkat Odeh

The Gulfstream 450 business jet to be deployed for the observation. Image courtesy M. Shawkat Odeh

The WT1190F observation mission will be conducted from a Gulfstream 450 business jet, sponsored by United Arab Emirates and coordinated by Mohammad Shawkat Odeh from the International Astronomical Center, Abu Dhabi. There are only five windows available to observe the object. The observation teams Comprise:

  • Peter Jenniskens, Mike Koop, Jim Albers (SETI Institute): High dynamic range imaging, exact timing, flight path optimisation
  • Ron Dantowitz, Forrest Gasdia (Clay Center Observatory): High resolution imaging, IR spectral imaging
  • Stefan Löhle, Fabian Zander (HEFDiG): Simple VIS spectroscopy
  • Mohammad Shawkat Odeh (IAC): Imaging cameras

The goal of the observations is to acquire video sufficiently resolved to provide data for modelling this reentry, which will then be used to improve our understanding of the reentry physics of space debris.

At the Institute of Space Systems in Stuttgart, HEFDiG routinely simulates these processes in ground-testing facilities, and so getting live data would be very helpful for improving these efforts.

Experimental set up of HEFDiG in the laboratory in Stuttgart. L: Dr S. Loehle, R: Dr F. Zander. Image courtesy S. Loehle

Experimental set up of HEFDiG in the laboratory in Stuttgart. L: Dr S. Loehle, R: Dr F. Zander. Image courtesy S. Loehle

The system we have foreseen (the laboratory installation is seen above) is a combination of video imaging and high-resolution spectroscopy in visible wavelengths using a fibre-fed Echelle spectrograph. It will be a very challenging endeavour, because the reentry will last, perhaps, not much longer than 8 seconds.

WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO AN EXCITING TRIP!



from Rocket Science » Rocket Science http://ift.tt/20gLeUz
v

Editor's note: We received word late this afternoon that ESA's Space Situational Awareness (SSA) Programme office will sponsor a European team to join an airborne observation campaign to track and observe the reentry of WT1190F, an unidentified object thought to be a discarded rocket body. It is forecast to enter Earth's atmosphere high above the Indian Ocean on 13 November. Here is a short update from Dr Stefan Löhle, lead scientist on the University of Stuttgart team that will conduct the observations.

Two researchers from the High Enthalpy Flow Diagnostics Group (HEFDiG), Institute of Space Systems, University of Stuttgart, Germany, will participate in an airborne observation campaign to track and record the reentry of the unknown object dubbed WTF1190F, expected to reenter over the Indian Ocean at 06:19 GMT (11:49 local; 07:19 CET) on 13 November 2015.

Dr Stefan Löhle and Dr Fabian Zander, both experienced researchers in optical diagnostics of aero-thermodynamic phenomena, will deploy their instruments on board an aircraft that will observe WTF1190F reentry. ESA is sponsoring this mission, which will complement other space- and ground-based observation efforts and is expected to provide valuable data on reentry physics.

WT1190F seen from ground. The object was observed by B. Bolin, R. Jedicke and M. Micheli from the University of Arizona in their Catalina Sky Survey Program.

WT1190F seen from ground. The object was observed by B. Bolin, R. Jedicke and M. Micheli from the University of Arizona in their Catalina Sky
Survey Program.

Object WTF1190F was observed by B. Bolin, R. Jedicke and M. Micheli via the University of Arizona's Catalina Sky Survey Program (red arrow in the image).

It is not yet known what the object is, exactly. From its behaviour, it can be surmised that, due to its low density, it is possibly hollow and thus probably a man-made piece of space junk. The size is approximately 2 m. From analysis performed so far, it is thought that object will enter (i.e. re-enter) the Earth's atmosphere on 13 November 2015, around mid-day, with an entry velocity of about 11 km/s. The entry interface angle is predicted to be 30°.

Thus, a very steep, high-speed entry is expected, so that most probably the object will be destroyed in the upper atmospheric layers.

The interest in observing such objects is, on the one hand, that this could serve as a 'test case' for future asteroid entries, and, on the other hand, the data collected can be used to improve our understanding of space debris behavior.

In the past, the University of Stuttgart's HEFDiG group has participated in the airborne observations of Hayabusa (2010) and ESA's ATV-1 (2008). Most recently, Stefan was the science team lead in the mission to observe the re-entry of the last ATV, Georges Lemaître, which was cancelled due to technical issues and which was a joint ESA-NASA activity.

The Gulfstream 450 business jet to be deployed for the observation. Image courtesy M. Shawkat Odeh

The Gulfstream 450 business jet to be deployed for the observation. Image courtesy M. Shawkat Odeh

The WT1190F observation mission will be conducted from a Gulfstream 450 business jet, sponsored by United Arab Emirates and coordinated by Mohammad Shawkat Odeh from the International Astronomical Center, Abu Dhabi. There are only five windows available to observe the object. The observation teams Comprise:

  • Peter Jenniskens, Mike Koop, Jim Albers (SETI Institute): High dynamic range imaging, exact timing, flight path optimisation
  • Ron Dantowitz, Forrest Gasdia (Clay Center Observatory): High resolution imaging, IR spectral imaging
  • Stefan Löhle, Fabian Zander (HEFDiG): Simple VIS spectroscopy
  • Mohammad Shawkat Odeh (IAC): Imaging cameras

The goal of the observations is to acquire video sufficiently resolved to provide data for modelling this reentry, which will then be used to improve our understanding of the reentry physics of space debris.

At the Institute of Space Systems in Stuttgart, HEFDiG routinely simulates these processes in ground-testing facilities, and so getting live data would be very helpful for improving these efforts.

Experimental set up of HEFDiG in the laboratory in Stuttgart. L: Dr S. Loehle, R: Dr F. Zander. Image courtesy S. Loehle

Experimental set up of HEFDiG in the laboratory in Stuttgart. L: Dr S. Loehle, R: Dr F. Zander. Image courtesy S. Loehle

The system we have foreseen (the laboratory installation is seen above) is a combination of video imaging and high-resolution spectroscopy in visible wavelengths using a fibre-fed Echelle spectrograph. It will be a very challenging endeavour, because the reentry will last, perhaps, not much longer than 8 seconds.

WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO AN EXCITING TRIP!



from Rocket Science » Rocket Science http://ift.tt/20gLeUz
v

#ScifestBoo Halloween Contest [USA Science and Engineering Festival: The Blog]

Website HalloweenShow us how you celebrate Halloween using STEM! Carve science themed pumpkins, create gooey spooky experiments or dress up as your favorite Mad Scientist! Have fun with your STEMtastic creations!

How do you enter? It’s easy! From now until Halloween night, just post pictures of your activity or creation onTwitter, Instagram and/or on our Facebook wall and use #ScifestBoo!  (Be sure to tag us)

Contest is open to groups and individuals (ages 5-18). Note: Parents and teachers can post on behalf of children.

 



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1LHdBDK

Website HalloweenShow us how you celebrate Halloween using STEM! Carve science themed pumpkins, create gooey spooky experiments or dress up as your favorite Mad Scientist! Have fun with your STEMtastic creations!

How do you enter? It’s easy! From now until Halloween night, just post pictures of your activity or creation onTwitter, Instagram and/or on our Facebook wall and use #ScifestBoo!  (Be sure to tag us)

Contest is open to groups and individuals (ages 5-18). Note: Parents and teachers can post on behalf of children.

 



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1LHdBDK

Adult Vaccine Access Coalition launches to rally efforts to increase adult immunization rates [The Pump Handle]

When it comes to immunization rates in the United States, the story is a mixed one. Among children, we’ve absolutely excelled. In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention considers the nation’s childhood vaccination rate as one of the greatest public health achievements of the 20th century. But when it comes to American adults — 50,000 of whom die every year from vaccine-preventable diseases — it’s a very different story.

Earlier this year, CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report reported that uptake of recommended adult immunizations remains low and is far below Healthy People 2020 targets. (Healthy People 2020 sets the nation’s health objectives for the current decade.) In analyzing data from the 2013 National Health Interview Survey, researchers found that just more than 17 percent of adults received a tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis (Tdap) vaccine; 24.2 percent received a vaccine against shingles; just 5.9 percent of young men received a human papillomavirus vaccine; and about 21 percent of adults at high risk received a pneumococcal vaccine. During the 2014-2015 influenza season, adult flu immunization rates did go up by 1.4 percent, but the overall rate was still below 50 percent.

The low rates not only mean many adults remain susceptible to preventable diseases, but that they risk transmitting often dangerous diseases to particularly vulnerable populations, such as very young children, the elderly and those with impaired immune systems. And consider this: The flu alone costs the U.S. billions of dollars in medical care and lost productivity.

These less-than-ideal adult vaccination rates have attracted the attention and action of health professionals for quite some time. However, in September at a briefing in the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., a new coalition of stakeholders from across the health care system officially declared its intention to take up the issue of adult immunizations in earnest and facilitate new solutions to strengthen and enhance access to adult vaccines. Known as the Adult Vaccine Access Coalition (AVAC), the group’s diverse members include health care providers, pharmacists, public health organizations, vaccine makers, and patient and consumer groups. Among its many member groups are the American Public Health Association, American Pharmacists Association, American Academy of Family Physicians, and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.

The coalition’s policy priorities are three-fold: improving adult immunization data collection; establishing new benchmarks to measure and encourage progress; and advocating for initiatives that boost adult vaccine rates among the most vulnerable and begin to close racial and ethnic disparities in vaccine uptake. Laura Hanen, co-chair of the new coalition and chief of government affairs at the National Association of County and City Health Officials, said the coalition is an opportunity to bring all the stakeholders together and channel relevant resources and skills toward one overriding goal.

“We’ve all been working on this issue in our individual lanes, whether it’s public health groups, health care providers, pharmacists,” Hanen told me. “Now we’re coming together to create collective leverage and build more understanding and awareness around the barriers to adult immunization and try to address it in the post-Affordable Care Act era.”

So why are adult vaccine rates so low? Especially when the U.S. has made such great strides in childhood vaccination coverage. As with most public health conundrums, there are many contributors, but Hanen pointed to a few big ones. Among them are provider and patient awareness. Recommended adult vaccination schedules are not necessarily easy to understand — different vaccines are recommended for different age groups and for people with particular health issues and susceptibilities. It can be “incredibly complicated,” Hanen noted.

Cost and financial reimbursement for adult immunizations have also traditionally been barriers, she said, though new ACA provisions will likely reduce those hurdles. (Under the health reform law, adults who purchase insurance through the new insurance marketplace are entitled to Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices-recommended vaccines with no cost-sharing.) Hanen also added that geographic challenges play a role, noting that not all providers carry the full spectrum of recommended adult vaccines.

Another big contributor, she told me, is that unlike childhood vaccines, there’s no nationwide infrastructure and support system in place devoted to increasing adult vaccine rates. For children, there’s the national Vaccines for Children program, which provides vaccines at no cost to children whose families may not otherwise be able to afford the life-saving drugs. There’s the Section 317 Immunization Program, a federally funded initiative that provides vaccines to uninsured and underinsured kids and adults; there’s school vaccine requirements; and there’s comprehensive reporting of child immunizations to public health agencies so officials can identify gaps and areas of need. In other words, there’s an entire system built to ensure children are protected against vaccine-preventable diseases — and that system has worked incredibly well. Sadly, that’s simply not the case with adults.

Fortunately, AVAC wants to change that. Building on current vaccine systems to improve adult rates is a priority focus for the coalition. For example, Hanen noted that while every state has an immunization registry, their focus has primarily been on engaging with pediatricians and collecting data on childhood immunization coverage. However, the same system could be used to beef up adult vaccine rates too — health departments just need the resources to engage more diverse providers in the registry process, she said. Ideally, all vaccine providers, whether physicians or pharmacists, would be able to access the registry to view an adult’s immunization record, which would give the provider a chance to offer their adult patients seasonal or newly recommended immunizations. In addition, more providers would report adult vaccine data to the registries, providing public health practitioners with the valuable data needed to inform education campaigns, identify coverage gaps and pinpoint particularly vulnerable communities.

“The challenge is that immunization registries need more resources to be more robust,” Hanen said. “With health information technology, we have the opportunity to improve reporting and access and increase cooperability with health systems and records, but we’re not quite there yet.”

Strengthening state registries is just one piece of the coalition’s goals. Overall, AVAC is dedicated to finding systemic and evidence-based answers to the adult vaccine problem. Already, the coalition is speaking out on a number of federal measures that affect adult vaccine access and offering solutions. But as with any problem that has as many contributors and stakeholders as the adult vaccine puzzle, there’s “no magic bullet,” Hanen told me.

“That’s the big challenge,” she said. “It’s all connected, but there’s not one solution.”

To learn more about AVAC and the importance of adult immunizations, visit http://ift.tt/1Oe83Vk.

Kim Krisberg is a freelance public health writer living in Austin, Texas, and has been writing about public health for more than a decade.



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1irfJF8

When it comes to immunization rates in the United States, the story is a mixed one. Among children, we’ve absolutely excelled. In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention considers the nation’s childhood vaccination rate as one of the greatest public health achievements of the 20th century. But when it comes to American adults — 50,000 of whom die every year from vaccine-preventable diseases — it’s a very different story.

Earlier this year, CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report reported that uptake of recommended adult immunizations remains low and is far below Healthy People 2020 targets. (Healthy People 2020 sets the nation’s health objectives for the current decade.) In analyzing data from the 2013 National Health Interview Survey, researchers found that just more than 17 percent of adults received a tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis (Tdap) vaccine; 24.2 percent received a vaccine against shingles; just 5.9 percent of young men received a human papillomavirus vaccine; and about 21 percent of adults at high risk received a pneumococcal vaccine. During the 2014-2015 influenza season, adult flu immunization rates did go up by 1.4 percent, but the overall rate was still below 50 percent.

The low rates not only mean many adults remain susceptible to preventable diseases, but that they risk transmitting often dangerous diseases to particularly vulnerable populations, such as very young children, the elderly and those with impaired immune systems. And consider this: The flu alone costs the U.S. billions of dollars in medical care and lost productivity.

These less-than-ideal adult vaccination rates have attracted the attention and action of health professionals for quite some time. However, in September at a briefing in the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., a new coalition of stakeholders from across the health care system officially declared its intention to take up the issue of adult immunizations in earnest and facilitate new solutions to strengthen and enhance access to adult vaccines. Known as the Adult Vaccine Access Coalition (AVAC), the group’s diverse members include health care providers, pharmacists, public health organizations, vaccine makers, and patient and consumer groups. Among its many member groups are the American Public Health Association, American Pharmacists Association, American Academy of Family Physicians, and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.

The coalition’s policy priorities are three-fold: improving adult immunization data collection; establishing new benchmarks to measure and encourage progress; and advocating for initiatives that boost adult vaccine rates among the most vulnerable and begin to close racial and ethnic disparities in vaccine uptake. Laura Hanen, co-chair of the new coalition and chief of government affairs at the National Association of County and City Health Officials, said the coalition is an opportunity to bring all the stakeholders together and channel relevant resources and skills toward one overriding goal.

“We’ve all been working on this issue in our individual lanes, whether it’s public health groups, health care providers, pharmacists,” Hanen told me. “Now we’re coming together to create collective leverage and build more understanding and awareness around the barriers to adult immunization and try to address it in the post-Affordable Care Act era.”

So why are adult vaccine rates so low? Especially when the U.S. has made such great strides in childhood vaccination coverage. As with most public health conundrums, there are many contributors, but Hanen pointed to a few big ones. Among them are provider and patient awareness. Recommended adult vaccination schedules are not necessarily easy to understand — different vaccines are recommended for different age groups and for people with particular health issues and susceptibilities. It can be “incredibly complicated,” Hanen noted.

Cost and financial reimbursement for adult immunizations have also traditionally been barriers, she said, though new ACA provisions will likely reduce those hurdles. (Under the health reform law, adults who purchase insurance through the new insurance marketplace are entitled to Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices-recommended vaccines with no cost-sharing.) Hanen also added that geographic challenges play a role, noting that not all providers carry the full spectrum of recommended adult vaccines.

Another big contributor, she told me, is that unlike childhood vaccines, there’s no nationwide infrastructure and support system in place devoted to increasing adult vaccine rates. For children, there’s the national Vaccines for Children program, which provides vaccines at no cost to children whose families may not otherwise be able to afford the life-saving drugs. There’s the Section 317 Immunization Program, a federally funded initiative that provides vaccines to uninsured and underinsured kids and adults; there’s school vaccine requirements; and there’s comprehensive reporting of child immunizations to public health agencies so officials can identify gaps and areas of need. In other words, there’s an entire system built to ensure children are protected against vaccine-preventable diseases — and that system has worked incredibly well. Sadly, that’s simply not the case with adults.

Fortunately, AVAC wants to change that. Building on current vaccine systems to improve adult rates is a priority focus for the coalition. For example, Hanen noted that while every state has an immunization registry, their focus has primarily been on engaging with pediatricians and collecting data on childhood immunization coverage. However, the same system could be used to beef up adult vaccine rates too — health departments just need the resources to engage more diverse providers in the registry process, she said. Ideally, all vaccine providers, whether physicians or pharmacists, would be able to access the registry to view an adult’s immunization record, which would give the provider a chance to offer their adult patients seasonal or newly recommended immunizations. In addition, more providers would report adult vaccine data to the registries, providing public health practitioners with the valuable data needed to inform education campaigns, identify coverage gaps and pinpoint particularly vulnerable communities.

“The challenge is that immunization registries need more resources to be more robust,” Hanen said. “With health information technology, we have the opportunity to improve reporting and access and increase cooperability with health systems and records, but we’re not quite there yet.”

Strengthening state registries is just one piece of the coalition’s goals. Overall, AVAC is dedicated to finding systemic and evidence-based answers to the adult vaccine problem. Already, the coalition is speaking out on a number of federal measures that affect adult vaccine access and offering solutions. But as with any problem that has as many contributors and stakeholders as the adult vaccine puzzle, there’s “no magic bullet,” Hanen told me.

“That’s the big challenge,” she said. “It’s all connected, but there’s not one solution.”

To learn more about AVAC and the importance of adult immunizations, visit http://ift.tt/1Oe83Vk.

Kim Krisberg is a freelance public health writer living in Austin, Texas, and has been writing about public health for more than a decade.



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1irfJF8

This Week in EPA Science

By Kacey FitzpatrickResearch Recap graphic identifier

Need a last minute Halloween costume idea? Want to stand out from the sea of flowing capes and neon spandex? Try going as a non-traditional superhero—an environmental scientist! Check out some of our researchers at work to get an idea of how they work to save the world every day.

Here is some of the latest research they’ve been working on.

  • VERGE 2015 Conference
    EPA’s Dan Costa was one of three panelists along with representatives from Aclima and Google at the Verge 2015 conference, Silicon Valley’s annual meeting of entrepreneurs held in San Jose, California. Their session focused on air sensors and their utilities on mobile platforms and how the development of various sensors will someday transform the way individuals, communities and possibly government will use these new data. The session was the most well attended session of the meeting.

    Read more about the partnership in the Science Matters story Private, Government Collaboration Advances Air Sensor Technology.

  • EPA Co-authored Article Selected for Society’s Annual Award
    An article written by EPA’s Elizabeth D. Hilborn and UPenn’s R. Val Beasley, published in the journal Toxins in April, has been selected as the second-place winner of the 2015 Award for Outstanding Research Article in Biosurveillance in the “Impact of Field of Biosurveillance” category by the International Society for Disease Surveillance. The article highlights the utility of using cyanobacteria-associated animal illnesses and deaths to provide early warnings of the potential for increased human health risks from harmful algal blooms.

    Read the article One Health and Cyanobacteria in Freshwater Systems: Animal Illnesses and Deaths Are Sentinel Events for Human Health Risks here.

  • Embassy Science Fellow Discusses Climate Change in Australia
    EPA scientist Rachelle Duvall, currently an Embassy Science Fellow, was invited to be a guest scientist at Questacon-The National Science and Technology Centre in Canberra, Australia on October 13. She presented hands-on science activities to over 200 Questacon visitors. A guest appearance was made by former Prime Minister of Australia, John Howard, who “gave it a go” and participated in the activities.

    Check out Duvall’s public seminar on climate change.

  • Advancing Children’s Health for a Lifetime
    It’s Children’s Health Month and this week results and impacts of research from the Children’s Environmental Health & Disease Prevention Research Centers (Children’s Centers)—supported jointly by EPA and National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences supported—were featured at a special Congressional briefing. This event was followed by the Children’s Centers annual meeting which included presentations and discussions that explore connections between research findings, clinical and community practice, and child protective policies.

    Learn more about the Children’s Centers here.

  • World Stroke Day
    World Stroke Day, established by the World Stroke Organization, was observed worldwide on October 29th. Studies show that air pollution can trigger heart attacks, strokes and worsen heart failure in people who are at risk for these conditions. EPA is raising awareness of heart disease and its link to air pollution and other environmental factors as a partner in the Million Hearts, a national initiative to prevent 1 million heart attacks and strokes by 2017.

    Check out EPA’s Healthy Heart Toolkit and Research.

If you have any comments or questions about what I share or about the week’s events, please submit them below in the comments section!

 

About the Author: Kacey Fitzpatrick is a student contractor and writer working with the science communication team in EPA’s Office of Research and Development.



from The EPA Blog http://ift.tt/1LH88Nq

By Kacey FitzpatrickResearch Recap graphic identifier

Need a last minute Halloween costume idea? Want to stand out from the sea of flowing capes and neon spandex? Try going as a non-traditional superhero—an environmental scientist! Check out some of our researchers at work to get an idea of how they work to save the world every day.

Here is some of the latest research they’ve been working on.

  • VERGE 2015 Conference
    EPA’s Dan Costa was one of three panelists along with representatives from Aclima and Google at the Verge 2015 conference, Silicon Valley’s annual meeting of entrepreneurs held in San Jose, California. Their session focused on air sensors and their utilities on mobile platforms and how the development of various sensors will someday transform the way individuals, communities and possibly government will use these new data. The session was the most well attended session of the meeting.

    Read more about the partnership in the Science Matters story Private, Government Collaboration Advances Air Sensor Technology.

  • EPA Co-authored Article Selected for Society’s Annual Award
    An article written by EPA’s Elizabeth D. Hilborn and UPenn’s R. Val Beasley, published in the journal Toxins in April, has been selected as the second-place winner of the 2015 Award for Outstanding Research Article in Biosurveillance in the “Impact of Field of Biosurveillance” category by the International Society for Disease Surveillance. The article highlights the utility of using cyanobacteria-associated animal illnesses and deaths to provide early warnings of the potential for increased human health risks from harmful algal blooms.

    Read the article One Health and Cyanobacteria in Freshwater Systems: Animal Illnesses and Deaths Are Sentinel Events for Human Health Risks here.

  • Embassy Science Fellow Discusses Climate Change in Australia
    EPA scientist Rachelle Duvall, currently an Embassy Science Fellow, was invited to be a guest scientist at Questacon-The National Science and Technology Centre in Canberra, Australia on October 13. She presented hands-on science activities to over 200 Questacon visitors. A guest appearance was made by former Prime Minister of Australia, John Howard, who “gave it a go” and participated in the activities.

    Check out Duvall’s public seminar on climate change.

  • Advancing Children’s Health for a Lifetime
    It’s Children’s Health Month and this week results and impacts of research from the Children’s Environmental Health & Disease Prevention Research Centers (Children’s Centers)—supported jointly by EPA and National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences supported—were featured at a special Congressional briefing. This event was followed by the Children’s Centers annual meeting which included presentations and discussions that explore connections between research findings, clinical and community practice, and child protective policies.

    Learn more about the Children’s Centers here.

  • World Stroke Day
    World Stroke Day, established by the World Stroke Organization, was observed worldwide on October 29th. Studies show that air pollution can trigger heart attacks, strokes and worsen heart failure in people who are at risk for these conditions. EPA is raising awareness of heart disease and its link to air pollution and other environmental factors as a partner in the Million Hearts, a national initiative to prevent 1 million heart attacks and strokes by 2017.

    Check out EPA’s Healthy Heart Toolkit and Research.

If you have any comments or questions about what I share or about the week’s events, please submit them below in the comments section!

 

About the Author: Kacey Fitzpatrick is a student contractor and writer working with the science communication team in EPA’s Office of Research and Development.



from The EPA Blog http://ift.tt/1LH88Nq

The World’s Plan to Save Itself, in 6 Charts

Here’s how countries around the world are promising to fight climate change.

World leaders have a pretty comprehensive plan to fight climate change, according to a United Nations report released Friday—even if it doesn’t go as far as many of them had hoped.

In just over a month, representatives from most of the countries on Earth will gather in Paris in an attempt to finalize an international agreement to limit global warming and adapt to its impacts. The video above is a snappy explainer of what’s at stake at this meeting, but suffice it to say the proposed deal is split into two keys parts. First is the core agreement, parts of which may be legally binding, that comprises broad, non-specific guidelines for all countries. It calls on countries to take steps such as transparently reporting greenhouse gas emissions and committing to ramp up climate action over the next few decades.

But the real meat-and-potatoes is in the second part, the “intended nationally determined contributions” (INDCs). The INDCs are what sets the Paris talks apart from past attempts at a global climate agreement in Kyoto in 1997 and Copenhagen in 2009. Those summits either left out major polluters (the US dropped out of the Kyoto Protocol; China and India were exempted) or fell apart completely (Copenhagen), in large part because they were built around universal greenhouse gas reduction targets that not everyone could agree to.

This time around, the UN process is more like a potluck, where each country brings its own unique contribution based on its needs and abilities; those are the INDCs. The US, for example, has committed to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, mostly by going after carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants. So far, according to the World Resources Institute, 126 plans have been submitted, covering about 86 percent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. (The European Union submitted one joint plan for all its members.) Those contributions are likely to limit global warming to around 2.7 degrees Celsius (4.9 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels by 2100. That’s above the 2 degrees C (3.6 degrees F) limit scientists say is necessary to avert the worst impacts—but it’s also about 1 degree C less warming than would would happen if the world continued on its present course.

Now, we have a bit more insight into how countries are planning to make this happen. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the group that is overseeing the Paris talks, combed through all the INDCs to look for trends. Its report is a bit convoluted and repetitive; I don’t recommend it to any but the nerdiest climate nerds. But I pulled out a few of the charts as an overview of what global action on climate change really looks like.

Types of targets: Most of the INDCs contain specific emission reduction targets. (Not all do; some countries, such as the small island nations, have such small or nonexistent emissions that it wouldn’t make sense to promise to reduce them.) The most common way to state these targets is to promise that emissions at X future date will be lower than they would be with no action. Indonesia, for example, has pledged to increase its emissions over the next 25 years by 29 percent less than it would have under a “business as usual” scenario. The US commitment fits in the second category, an “absolute” target where emissions actually begin to go down. Others specify a date at which emissions will “peak,” or set a goal for emissions per unit of GDP or energy production (“intensity”).

targets
UNFCCC

Greenhouse gases: The commitments cover a broad range of greenhouse gases (most cover more than one), but carbon dioxide is the most common enemy. That’s no surprise, as it’s by far the most common.

gases
UNFCCC

Economic sectors: In different countries, different economic sectors are more or less responsible for climate pollution. In the US, the number-one source of emissions is coal-fired power plants; thus, President Barack Obama’s plans focus on the power sector. In Indonesia, by contrast, deforestation is the biggest problem. Most plans cover more than one sector, but the most common is energy.

sectors
UNFCCC

How to fix it: This section finds that implementing renewable energy is the most common way countries are planning to meet their targets. More interesting is the tiny role played by carbon capture, use, and storage, down at the bottom of the chart. This refers to technology that “captures” greenhouse gas emissions on their way out of power plants, or directly from the atmosphere, and buries or re-purposes them. Support for carbon capture—also known as “clean coal”—is popular with policymakers who don’t want to curb coal use (including GOP presidential contender John Kasich), even though it remains costly and unproven at scale.

areas
UNFCCC

How to adapt: Many countries’ INDCs also contain information about how they plan to adapt to climate change. Water use, agriculture, and public health appear to be the biggest areas of focus.

adaptation
UNFCCC

A terrible, no-good, very bad summary: The most important question is clearly how all this adds up to reducing the world’s greenhouse gas footprint and averting the worst threats posed by climate change. But the chart that addresses this question (below) is…not great. I’m including it so you have some sense of one big drawback of the Paris approach—without universal emissions targets, it’s a lot harder to specify what the cumulative effect of these plans will really be. In short, here’s what this chart shows: The gray line is global greenhouse gas emissions up to today. The orange line is how emissions will grow over the next couple decades if we do nothing. The three blue lines show how quickly we would need to reduce emissions to keep global warming to 2 degrees C; the longer we wait to take action, the steeper the cuts have to be. The yellow rectangles show a snapshot of where the INDCs leave us.

crappy chart
UNFCCC

So, we’re better off than before, but we’re not out of danger. That’s why it’s essential for the core agreement to include requirements that countries adopt even more aggressive goals in the future; that’s one of the key things that will be debated in Paris. In other words, the Paris meeting is just one key battle in a war that’s far from over, Jennifer Morgan, director of the WRI’s global climate program, said in a statement. “Despite the unprecedented level of effort, this report finds that current commitments are not yet sufficient to meet what the world needs. Countries must accelerate their efforts after the Paris summit in order to stave off climate change. The global climate agreement should include a clear mandate for countries to ramp up their commitments and set a long-term signal to phase out emissions as soon as possible.”



from Climate Desk http://ift.tt/1LH0anw
Here’s how countries around the world are promising to fight climate change.

World leaders have a pretty comprehensive plan to fight climate change, according to a United Nations report released Friday—even if it doesn’t go as far as many of them had hoped.

In just over a month, representatives from most of the countries on Earth will gather in Paris in an attempt to finalize an international agreement to limit global warming and adapt to its impacts. The video above is a snappy explainer of what’s at stake at this meeting, but suffice it to say the proposed deal is split into two keys parts. First is the core agreement, parts of which may be legally binding, that comprises broad, non-specific guidelines for all countries. It calls on countries to take steps such as transparently reporting greenhouse gas emissions and committing to ramp up climate action over the next few decades.

But the real meat-and-potatoes is in the second part, the “intended nationally determined contributions” (INDCs). The INDCs are what sets the Paris talks apart from past attempts at a global climate agreement in Kyoto in 1997 and Copenhagen in 2009. Those summits either left out major polluters (the US dropped out of the Kyoto Protocol; China and India were exempted) or fell apart completely (Copenhagen), in large part because they were built around universal greenhouse gas reduction targets that not everyone could agree to.

This time around, the UN process is more like a potluck, where each country brings its own unique contribution based on its needs and abilities; those are the INDCs. The US, for example, has committed to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, mostly by going after carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants. So far, according to the World Resources Institute, 126 plans have been submitted, covering about 86 percent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. (The European Union submitted one joint plan for all its members.) Those contributions are likely to limit global warming to around 2.7 degrees Celsius (4.9 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels by 2100. That’s above the 2 degrees C (3.6 degrees F) limit scientists say is necessary to avert the worst impacts—but it’s also about 1 degree C less warming than would would happen if the world continued on its present course.

Now, we have a bit more insight into how countries are planning to make this happen. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the group that is overseeing the Paris talks, combed through all the INDCs to look for trends. Its report is a bit convoluted and repetitive; I don’t recommend it to any but the nerdiest climate nerds. But I pulled out a few of the charts as an overview of what global action on climate change really looks like.

Types of targets: Most of the INDCs contain specific emission reduction targets. (Not all do; some countries, such as the small island nations, have such small or nonexistent emissions that it wouldn’t make sense to promise to reduce them.) The most common way to state these targets is to promise that emissions at X future date will be lower than they would be with no action. Indonesia, for example, has pledged to increase its emissions over the next 25 years by 29 percent less than it would have under a “business as usual” scenario. The US commitment fits in the second category, an “absolute” target where emissions actually begin to go down. Others specify a date at which emissions will “peak,” or set a goal for emissions per unit of GDP or energy production (“intensity”).

targets
UNFCCC

Greenhouse gases: The commitments cover a broad range of greenhouse gases (most cover more than one), but carbon dioxide is the most common enemy. That’s no surprise, as it’s by far the most common.

gases
UNFCCC

Economic sectors: In different countries, different economic sectors are more or less responsible for climate pollution. In the US, the number-one source of emissions is coal-fired power plants; thus, President Barack Obama’s plans focus on the power sector. In Indonesia, by contrast, deforestation is the biggest problem. Most plans cover more than one sector, but the most common is energy.

sectors
UNFCCC

How to fix it: This section finds that implementing renewable energy is the most common way countries are planning to meet their targets. More interesting is the tiny role played by carbon capture, use, and storage, down at the bottom of the chart. This refers to technology that “captures” greenhouse gas emissions on their way out of power plants, or directly from the atmosphere, and buries or re-purposes them. Support for carbon capture—also known as “clean coal”—is popular with policymakers who don’t want to curb coal use (including GOP presidential contender John Kasich), even though it remains costly and unproven at scale.

areas
UNFCCC

How to adapt: Many countries’ INDCs also contain information about how they plan to adapt to climate change. Water use, agriculture, and public health appear to be the biggest areas of focus.

adaptation
UNFCCC

A terrible, no-good, very bad summary: The most important question is clearly how all this adds up to reducing the world’s greenhouse gas footprint and averting the worst threats posed by climate change. But the chart that addresses this question (below) is…not great. I’m including it so you have some sense of one big drawback of the Paris approach—without universal emissions targets, it’s a lot harder to specify what the cumulative effect of these plans will really be. In short, here’s what this chart shows: The gray line is global greenhouse gas emissions up to today. The orange line is how emissions will grow over the next couple decades if we do nothing. The three blue lines show how quickly we would need to reduce emissions to keep global warming to 2 degrees C; the longer we wait to take action, the steeper the cuts have to be. The yellow rectangles show a snapshot of where the INDCs leave us.

crappy chart
UNFCCC

So, we’re better off than before, but we’re not out of danger. That’s why it’s essential for the core agreement to include requirements that countries adopt even more aggressive goals in the future; that’s one of the key things that will be debated in Paris. In other words, the Paris meeting is just one key battle in a war that’s far from over, Jennifer Morgan, director of the WRI’s global climate program, said in a statement. “Despite the unprecedented level of effort, this report finds that current commitments are not yet sufficient to meet what the world needs. Countries must accelerate their efforts after the Paris summit in order to stave off climate change. The global climate agreement should include a clear mandate for countries to ramp up their commitments and set a long-term signal to phase out emissions as soon as possible.”



from Climate Desk http://ift.tt/1LH0anw