Eating saturated fat is bad for the brain [Life Lines]

I know this is not a comparative physiology topic, but this article caught my attention as I know I just ate a rather high fat meal last week for Thanksgiving and I plan to do the same throughout the holiday season.

Insulin does more than just lowering blood sugar by increasing its uptake into tissues. It can also increase blood flow to the hippocampal region of the brain to help cognitive function. This area of the brain is important in memory formation and spatial orientation. A new study published in the American Journal of Physiology – Endocrinology and Metabolism used ultrasound to measure blood flow to this region of the brain in rats fed either a normal fat or high fat diet for 6 months. Their results show that eating a high fat diet over a long period of time causes blood vessels in the brain to lose their ability to respond to insulin, meaning blood flow to the region is reduced. Because this area is so important in our ability to recall information, the researchers speculate that insulin resistance in the brain of people who are obese or diabetic may help explain why they experience cognitive impairments or even dementia.

Source: 

Z Fu, J Wu, T Nesil, MD Li, KW Aylor, Z Liu. Long-term high-fat diet induces hippocampal microvascular insulin resistance and cognitive dysfunction. Articles in PresS. American Journal of Physiology – Endocrinology and Metabolism (November 29, 2016). doi:10.1152/ajpendo.00297.2016

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2gMmAsE

I know this is not a comparative physiology topic, but this article caught my attention as I know I just ate a rather high fat meal last week for Thanksgiving and I plan to do the same throughout the holiday season.

Insulin does more than just lowering blood sugar by increasing its uptake into tissues. It can also increase blood flow to the hippocampal region of the brain to help cognitive function. This area of the brain is important in memory formation and spatial orientation. A new study published in the American Journal of Physiology – Endocrinology and Metabolism used ultrasound to measure blood flow to this region of the brain in rats fed either a normal fat or high fat diet for 6 months. Their results show that eating a high fat diet over a long period of time causes blood vessels in the brain to lose their ability to respond to insulin, meaning blood flow to the region is reduced. Because this area is so important in our ability to recall information, the researchers speculate that insulin resistance in the brain of people who are obese or diabetic may help explain why they experience cognitive impairments or even dementia.

Source: 

Z Fu, J Wu, T Nesil, MD Li, KW Aylor, Z Liu. Long-term high-fat diet induces hippocampal microvascular insulin resistance and cognitive dysfunction. Articles in PresS. American Journal of Physiology – Endocrinology and Metabolism (November 29, 2016). doi:10.1152/ajpendo.00297.2016

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2gMmAsE

December guide to the bright planets

It’ll be easy to spot the moon and Venus in early December, but Mercury will present more of a challenge. You might need binoculars to spot the young moon and Mercury after sunset on November 30. Read more.

Two of the five bright planets rise to great prominence in December 2016. Venus and Jupiter almost seem to balance two sides of our sky. Venus, the brightest planet, blazes in the west first thing at dusk. Jupiter, second-brightest, lords over the eastern half of sky before sunrise. Mars joins Venus in the evening sky, though it’s higher up than Venus and sets in the west after Venus does. Venus and Mars remain evening objects throughout December, but Saturn is now lost in the sun’s glare. We expect the notoriously elusive bright planet Mercury to become visible at dusk/nightfall by early December. Day by day, Mercury climbs upward to reach its greatest evening elongation in the evening sky on December 10. Follow the links below to learn more about planets in December 2016.

Brilliant Venus is the “evening star”

Mars, east of Venus, until mid-to-late evening

Saturn lost in sun’s glare

Bright Jupiter is prominent before dawn

Mercury in west at dusk/nightfall

Like what EarthSky offers? Sign up for our free daily newsletter today!

Astronomy events, star parties, festivals, workshops

Visit a new EarthSky feature – Best Places to Stargaze – and add your fav.

Skywatcher, by Predrag Agatonovic.

Watch for the waxing crescent moon and the dazzling planet Venus to adorn the evening wilight for several days, centered on December 2 or 3. Read more.

Brilliant Venus is the “evening star.” Okay, it’s not a star. It’s a planet. But people will call it the evening star all the same. In these past weeks, many have noticed Venus and been amazed at its brilliance in the west after sunset. It’s the brightest planet and very, very bright, even though it’s been low in the sky.

Be sure to catch the waxing crescent moon near Venus in early December, as displayed on the sky chart above. Click here for details.

Venus will climb upward from the setting sun throughout the month. Watch for Venus to close the gap between itself and Mars. These two visible evening planets will be closer together on the sky’s dome by the month’s end and closer yet in January 2017.

From mid-northern latitudes (U.S. and Europe), Venus sets about three hours after the sun in early December, and four hours after sunset by the month’s end.

At mid-southern latitudes (Australia and South Africa), Venus sets about about three hours after the sun all month long.

The moon, Venus and Mars as seen from North America on December 4, 2016. But no matter where you reside worldwide, look first for the moon on this date, and then seek out Venus and Mars. Read more

Mars, east of Venus, until mid-to-late evening. After appearing as a bright red light in our sky last May and June, Mars now appears only modestly bright (though still ruddy),above dazzling Venus. Venus is so bright that it pops out almost immediately after sunset, but you’ll have to wait until nightfall to see fainter Mars. Look for the moon close to Mars for a few evenings, centered on or near December 4.

From mid-northern latitudes (U.S. and Europe), look for the red planet Mars to set in the west around 9 to 10 p.m. all month long.

At mid-southern latitudes (Australia and South Africa), Mars sets in the west around 11 p.m. or midnight in early December, and about an hour earlier by the month’s end.

Mars will linger in our sky for several more months. Keep in mind, however, that Earth is traveling away from Mars as we speak – moving far ahead of this planet in the endless race around the sun – so Mars is dimming in our evening sky. Mars is in its long, lingering, relatively inconspicuous phase now. It’ll be still visible in the west to the unaided eye – though not prominent – during its conjunction with Uranus on the evening of February 27, 2017.

Mars won’t make its transition from the evening to the morning sky until July 27, 2017. Even so, Mars’ stature in the evening sky will continue to diminish to that of a rather faint “star,” and we expect few – if any – skywatchers to observe the conjunction of Mars and Mercury in the evening sky on June 28, 2017.

The conjunction of Mars and Venus in the morning sky on October 5, 2017, may well present the first good opportunity to spot Mars in the morning sky when it returns from being behind the sun on July 27, 2017.

Looking for a sky almanac? EarthSky recommends…

View larger | Mikhail Chubarets in the Ukraine made this chart. It shows the view of Mars through a telescope in 2016. We never see Mars as a disk like this with the eye alone. But you can see why Mars was bright to the eye in 2016, and is now fading.

Saturn lost in sun’s glare. Saturn swings behind the sun on December 10, as this world transitions from the evening to morning sky.

In both the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, Saturn might return to visibility in the east before sunrise in very late December 2016. More likely, you’ll have to wait until January 2017 to view Saturn in the morning sky.

Saturn, the farthest world that you can easily view with the eye alone, appears golden in color. It shines with a steady light.

Binoculars don’t reveal Saturn’s gorgeous rings, by the way, although binoculars will enhance Saturn’s golden color. To see the rings, you need a small telescope. A telescope will also reveal one or more of Saturn’s many moons, most notably Titan.

Saturn’s rings are inclined at a little more than 26^o from edge-on, exhibiting their northern face. Next year, in October 2017, the rings will open most widely, displaying a maximum inclination of 27^o.

As with so much in space (and on Earth), the appearance of Saturn’s rings from Earth is cyclical. In the year 2025, the rings will appear edge-on as seen from Earth. After that, we’ll begin to see the south side of Saturn’s rings, to increase to a maximum inclination of 27^o by May 2032.

Click here for recommended almanacs. They can help you know when the planets rise, transit and set in your sky

Tom Wildoner over-exposed Saturn itself to capture this view of Saturn’s moons on June 25, 2016. Visit Tom at LeisurelyScientist.com.

Contrasting the size of Saturn and its rings with our planet Earth via Hubble Heritage Team.

Use the moon to locate Jupiter in the morning sky for several days, centered on or near December 22. Read more.

Bright Jupiter is prominent before dawn. Jupiter’s increasing prominence as the “morning star” will be hard to overlook in December. To see Jupiter, seek out the brightest starlike object in the predawn sky or the morning twilight and that’ll be the king planet Jupiter!

From mid-northern latitudes, like those in the U.S. and Europe, Jupiter rises about 2.5 hours after midnight in early December and around one hour after the midnight hour by the month’s end.

From mid-southern latitudes (Australia), look for Jupiter to rise about 2 hours after midnight in early December and around midnight by the end of the month.

If you’re not a night owl, your best bet for catching Jupiter is to wake up before sunrise to see this brilliant beauty of a planet lighting up the predawn and dawn sky. Watch for the waning crescent moon to join up with Jupiter for several days, centered on or near December 22. See the above sky chart.

By the way, Jupiter shines in front of the constellation Virgo, near Virgo’s brightest star, Spica. Jupiter serves a great reference for learning the constellations of the zodiac, because Jupiter stays in each constellation for roughly a year. So use Jupiter to become familiar with the star Spica and the constellation Virgo, starting now, and throughout 2017.

If you have binoculars or a telescope, it’s fairly easy to see Jupiter’s four major moons, which look like pinpricks of light on or near the same plane. They are often called the Galilean moons to honor Galileo, who discovered these great Jovian moons in 1610. In their order from Jupiter, these moons are Io, Europa, Ganymede and Callisto.

Jupiter and its four major moons via Jan Sandberg

These moons circle Jupiter around the Jovian equator. In cycles of six years, we view Jupiter’s equator edge-on. So, in 2015, we got to view a number of mutual events involving Jupiter’s moons through a high-powered telescope. Click here or here or here for more details.

Although Jupiter’s axial tilt is only 3^o out of perpendicular relative to the ecliptic (Earth’s orbital plane), Jupiter’s axis will tilt enough toward the sun and Earth so that the farthest of these four moons, Callisto, will NOT pass in front of Jupiter or behind Jupiter for a period of about three years, starting in late 2016. During this approximate 3-year period, Callisto will remain “perpetually” visible, alternately swinging “above” and “below” Jupiter.

Click here for a Jupiter’s moons almanac, courtesy of Sky & Telescope.

Throughout December 2016, an imaginary line from Mars through Venus points in the direction of Mercury. The only problem is that Mercury might have set by the time Mars becomes visible. In that case, draw your imaginary line to the horizon, using Mars and Venus. Then the following evening, look at this spot on the horizon for Mercury. Read more.

Mercury in west at dusk/nightfall. Mercury transitioned from the morning to the evening sky on October 27, 2016. This month, in December, Mercury will finally climb high enough from the glare of sunset to view in the evening sky from both the Northern Hemisphere and the Southern Hemisphere.

Possibly, some of you caught the thin waxing crescent moon near Mercury after sunset November 30.

Try viewing Mercury after sunset for a few weeks, centered on or near December 10. Mercury is tricky. If you look too soon, Mercury will be lost in the twilight glare; if you look too late, it will have followed the sun beneath the horizon. Watch for Mercury low in the sky, and near the sunset point on the horizon, seeking for this hidden treasure around 45 to 60 minutes after sunset. Remember, binoculars are always helpful for any Mercury search. Good Luck!

Click here for recommended almanacs; they can give you Mercury’s setting time in your sky.

What do we mean by bright planet? By bright planet, we mean any solar system planet that is easily visible without an optical aid and that has been watched by our ancestors since time immemorial. In their outward order from the sun, the five bright planets are Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn. These planets actually do appear bright in our sky. They are typically as bright as – or brighter than – the brightest stars. Plus, these relatively nearby worlds tend to shine with a steadier light than the distant, twinkling stars. You can spot them, and come to know them as faithful friends, if you try.

From late January, and through mid-February, 5 bright planets were visible at once in the predawn sky. This image is from February 8, 2016. It’s by Eliot Herman in Tucson, Arizona. View on Flickr.

Bottom line: In December 2016, three of the five bright planets appear in the evening sky at dusk/nightfall: Mercury, Venus and Mars. Jupiter reigns as the sole morning planet, whereas Saturn is lost in the sun’s glare.

Easily locate stars and constellations with EarthSky’s planisphere.

Don’t miss anything. Subscribe to EarthSky News by email

from EarthSky http://ift.tt/IJfHCr

It’ll be easy to spot the moon and Venus in early December, but Mercury will present more of a challenge. You might need binoculars to spot the young moon and Mercury after sunset on November 30. Read more.

Two of the five bright planets rise to great prominence in December 2016. Venus and Jupiter almost seem to balance two sides of our sky. Venus, the brightest planet, blazes in the west first thing at dusk. Jupiter, second-brightest, lords over the eastern half of sky before sunrise. Mars joins Venus in the evening sky, though it’s higher up than Venus and sets in the west after Venus does. Venus and Mars remain evening objects throughout December, but Saturn is now lost in the sun’s glare. We expect the notoriously elusive bright planet Mercury to become visible at dusk/nightfall by early December. Day by day, Mercury climbs upward to reach its greatest evening elongation in the evening sky on December 10. Follow the links below to learn more about planets in December 2016.

Brilliant Venus is the “evening star”

Mars, east of Venus, until mid-to-late evening

Saturn lost in sun’s glare

Bright Jupiter is prominent before dawn

Mercury in west at dusk/nightfall

Like what EarthSky offers? Sign up for our free daily newsletter today!

Astronomy events, star parties, festivals, workshops

Visit a new EarthSky feature – Best Places to Stargaze – and add your fav.

Skywatcher, by Predrag Agatonovic.

Watch for the waxing crescent moon and the dazzling planet Venus to adorn the evening wilight for several days, centered on December 2 or 3. Read more.

Brilliant Venus is the “evening star.” Okay, it’s not a star. It’s a planet. But people will call it the evening star all the same. In these past weeks, many have noticed Venus and been amazed at its brilliance in the west after sunset. It’s the brightest planet and very, very bright, even though it’s been low in the sky.

Be sure to catch the waxing crescent moon near Venus in early December, as displayed on the sky chart above. Click here for details.

Venus will climb upward from the setting sun throughout the month. Watch for Venus to close the gap between itself and Mars. These two visible evening planets will be closer together on the sky’s dome by the month’s end and closer yet in January 2017.

From mid-northern latitudes (U.S. and Europe), Venus sets about three hours after the sun in early December, and four hours after sunset by the month’s end.

At mid-southern latitudes (Australia and South Africa), Venus sets about about three hours after the sun all month long.

The moon, Venus and Mars as seen from North America on December 4, 2016. But no matter where you reside worldwide, look first for the moon on this date, and then seek out Venus and Mars. Read more

Mars, east of Venus, until mid-to-late evening. After appearing as a bright red light in our sky last May and June, Mars now appears only modestly bright (though still ruddy),above dazzling Venus. Venus is so bright that it pops out almost immediately after sunset, but you’ll have to wait until nightfall to see fainter Mars. Look for the moon close to Mars for a few evenings, centered on or near December 4.

From mid-northern latitudes (U.S. and Europe), look for the red planet Mars to set in the west around 9 to 10 p.m. all month long.

At mid-southern latitudes (Australia and South Africa), Mars sets in the west around 11 p.m. or midnight in early December, and about an hour earlier by the month’s end.

Mars will linger in our sky for several more months. Keep in mind, however, that Earth is traveling away from Mars as we speak – moving far ahead of this planet in the endless race around the sun – so Mars is dimming in our evening sky. Mars is in its long, lingering, relatively inconspicuous phase now. It’ll be still visible in the west to the unaided eye – though not prominent – during its conjunction with Uranus on the evening of February 27, 2017.

Mars won’t make its transition from the evening to the morning sky until July 27, 2017. Even so, Mars’ stature in the evening sky will continue to diminish to that of a rather faint “star,” and we expect few – if any – skywatchers to observe the conjunction of Mars and Mercury in the evening sky on June 28, 2017.

The conjunction of Mars and Venus in the morning sky on October 5, 2017, may well present the first good opportunity to spot Mars in the morning sky when it returns from being behind the sun on July 27, 2017.

Looking for a sky almanac? EarthSky recommends…

View larger | Mikhail Chubarets in the Ukraine made this chart. It shows the view of Mars through a telescope in 2016. We never see Mars as a disk like this with the eye alone. But you can see why Mars was bright to the eye in 2016, and is now fading.

Saturn lost in sun’s glare. Saturn swings behind the sun on December 10, as this world transitions from the evening to morning sky.

In both the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, Saturn might return to visibility in the east before sunrise in very late December 2016. More likely, you’ll have to wait until January 2017 to view Saturn in the morning sky.

Saturn, the farthest world that you can easily view with the eye alone, appears golden in color. It shines with a steady light.

Binoculars don’t reveal Saturn’s gorgeous rings, by the way, although binoculars will enhance Saturn’s golden color. To see the rings, you need a small telescope. A telescope will also reveal one or more of Saturn’s many moons, most notably Titan.

Saturn’s rings are inclined at a little more than 26^o from edge-on, exhibiting their northern face. Next year, in October 2017, the rings will open most widely, displaying a maximum inclination of 27^o.

As with so much in space (and on Earth), the appearance of Saturn’s rings from Earth is cyclical. In the year 2025, the rings will appear edge-on as seen from Earth. After that, we’ll begin to see the south side of Saturn’s rings, to increase to a maximum inclination of 27^o by May 2032.

Click here for recommended almanacs. They can help you know when the planets rise, transit and set in your sky

Tom Wildoner over-exposed Saturn itself to capture this view of Saturn’s moons on June 25, 2016. Visit Tom at LeisurelyScientist.com.

Contrasting the size of Saturn and its rings with our planet Earth via Hubble Heritage Team.

Use the moon to locate Jupiter in the morning sky for several days, centered on or near December 22. Read more.

Bright Jupiter is prominent before dawn. Jupiter’s increasing prominence as the “morning star” will be hard to overlook in December. To see Jupiter, seek out the brightest starlike object in the predawn sky or the morning twilight and that’ll be the king planet Jupiter!

From mid-northern latitudes, like those in the U.S. and Europe, Jupiter rises about 2.5 hours after midnight in early December and around one hour after the midnight hour by the month’s end.

From mid-southern latitudes (Australia), look for Jupiter to rise about 2 hours after midnight in early December and around midnight by the end of the month.

If you’re not a night owl, your best bet for catching Jupiter is to wake up before sunrise to see this brilliant beauty of a planet lighting up the predawn and dawn sky. Watch for the waning crescent moon to join up with Jupiter for several days, centered on or near December 22. See the above sky chart.

By the way, Jupiter shines in front of the constellation Virgo, near Virgo’s brightest star, Spica. Jupiter serves a great reference for learning the constellations of the zodiac, because Jupiter stays in each constellation for roughly a year. So use Jupiter to become familiar with the star Spica and the constellation Virgo, starting now, and throughout 2017.

If you have binoculars or a telescope, it’s fairly easy to see Jupiter’s four major moons, which look like pinpricks of light on or near the same plane. They are often called the Galilean moons to honor Galileo, who discovered these great Jovian moons in 1610. In their order from Jupiter, these moons are Io, Europa, Ganymede and Callisto.

Jupiter and its four major moons via Jan Sandberg

These moons circle Jupiter around the Jovian equator. In cycles of six years, we view Jupiter’s equator edge-on. So, in 2015, we got to view a number of mutual events involving Jupiter’s moons through a high-powered telescope. Click here or here or here for more details.

Although Jupiter’s axial tilt is only 3^o out of perpendicular relative to the ecliptic (Earth’s orbital plane), Jupiter’s axis will tilt enough toward the sun and Earth so that the farthest of these four moons, Callisto, will NOT pass in front of Jupiter or behind Jupiter for a period of about three years, starting in late 2016. During this approximate 3-year period, Callisto will remain “perpetually” visible, alternately swinging “above” and “below” Jupiter.

Click here for a Jupiter’s moons almanac, courtesy of Sky & Telescope.

Throughout December 2016, an imaginary line from Mars through Venus points in the direction of Mercury. The only problem is that Mercury might have set by the time Mars becomes visible. In that case, draw your imaginary line to the horizon, using Mars and Venus. Then the following evening, look at this spot on the horizon for Mercury. Read more.

Mercury in west at dusk/nightfall. Mercury transitioned from the morning to the evening sky on October 27, 2016. This month, in December, Mercury will finally climb high enough from the glare of sunset to view in the evening sky from both the Northern Hemisphere and the Southern Hemisphere.

Possibly, some of you caught the thin waxing crescent moon near Mercury after sunset November 30.

Try viewing Mercury after sunset for a few weeks, centered on or near December 10. Mercury is tricky. If you look too soon, Mercury will be lost in the twilight glare; if you look too late, it will have followed the sun beneath the horizon. Watch for Mercury low in the sky, and near the sunset point on the horizon, seeking for this hidden treasure around 45 to 60 minutes after sunset. Remember, binoculars are always helpful for any Mercury search. Good Luck!

Click here for recommended almanacs; they can give you Mercury’s setting time in your sky.

What do we mean by bright planet? By bright planet, we mean any solar system planet that is easily visible without an optical aid and that has been watched by our ancestors since time immemorial. In their outward order from the sun, the five bright planets are Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn. These planets actually do appear bright in our sky. They are typically as bright as – or brighter than – the brightest stars. Plus, these relatively nearby worlds tend to shine with a steadier light than the distant, twinkling stars. You can spot them, and come to know them as faithful friends, if you try.

From late January, and through mid-February, 5 bright planets were visible at once in the predawn sky. This image is from February 8, 2016. It’s by Eliot Herman in Tucson, Arizona. View on Flickr.

Bottom line: In December 2016, three of the five bright planets appear in the evening sky at dusk/nightfall: Mercury, Venus and Mars. Jupiter reigns as the sole morning planet, whereas Saturn is lost in the sun’s glare.

Easily locate stars and constellations with EarthSky’s planisphere.

Don’t miss anything. Subscribe to EarthSky News by email

from EarthSky http://ift.tt/IJfHCr

Should You Give Up Caffeine?

This post is part of KQED’s Do Now U project. Do Now U is a biweekly activity for students and the public to engage and respond to current issues using social media. Do Now U aims to build civic engagement and digital literacy for learners of all ages. This Read More …

Source:: DoNow Science

from QUEST http://ift.tt/2fCNoPW

This post is part of KQED’s Do Now U project. Do Now U is a biweekly activity for students and the public to engage and respond to current issues using social media. Do Now U aims to build civic engagement and digital literacy for learners of all ages. This Read More …

Source:: DoNow Science

from QUEST http://ift.tt/2fCNoPW

EPA beats Congress’ deadline, names first 10 chemicals for action under new law [The Pump Handle]

Good for them! They beat Congress’ deadline by 20 days.

That’s the first thing that came to mind yesterday when I read EPA’s announcement about the first 10 chemicals it’s selected for risk evaluations. EPA’s announcement is the first major milestone established by Congress when it passed sweeping changes earlier this year to the Toxic Substances Control Act. One provision of the law (Section 2605(b)(2)(A)) directed EPA to select 10 chemical substances from its 2014 “TSCA Work Plan for Chemical Assessments” and begin risk evaluations on them no later than 180 days after the law was enacted (i.e., December 19, 2016.)

The second thing I did was look at the list of 10. It includes super hazardous chemicals used in consumer products (e.g., methylene chloride, n-methylpyrrolidone (both used as paint strippers) as well as   tetrachloroethylene (PERC), trichloroethylene (TCE), and 1-Bromopropane. All of these have significant worker exposure. The list also includes asbestos—the deadly mineral that has long served as the poster child for why a new chemical safety law was needed.  President Obama explained it this way when he signed the bill in June:

“…the system was so complex, so burdensome that our country hasn’t even been able to uphold a ban on asbestos –a known carcinogen that kills as many as 10,000 Americans every year. I think a lot of Americans would be shocked by that.”

Following EPA’s announcement yesterday, Andy Igrejas, Director of Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families said:

“We support EPA’s choice of chemicals. The list they announced today is a strong one and appropriate EPA action will strengthen public health and environmental safety. We are particularly glad to see asbestos included on the list. The EPA’s inability to ban asbestos under the old law was a primary catalyst for the recent reforms. Asbestos is a major piece of unfinished business for the agency.”

So, what happens next?

EPA has six months to issue a document explaining the scope of its risk evaluation. Congress directed EPA to include in the scoping document information about exposure to the chemical, conditions of use, and the potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulations. The statute specifically mentions infants, children, pregnant women, workers, and the elderly as examples of susceptible subpopulations.

Congress also set a deadline for completing the actual risk evaluations. For each of these ten chemicals, EPA must publish its completed risk evaluation within three years of yesterday’s announcement. During that time period, EPA must publish a draft risk evaluation and allow public comment on it.

A risk evaluation, however, does not itself protect the public. If EPA’s evaluation determines that the chemical presents an unreasonable risk to humans and the environment, the agency must mitigate that risk within two years. The mitigation approaches, such as restricted use of the chemical or a phase-out of its use, would be subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking.

Environmental Defense Fund lead senior scientist Richard Denison put yesterday’s EPA announcement in perspective:

“…EPA’s issuance of this list in advance of the statutory deadline next month is a welcome sign of timely implementation of the new law. While not every chemical that everyone may have wanted is included among the first 10, that is because there are many more than 10 chemicals that need far greater scrutiny as to their safety.  Indeed, the longer “Work Plan Chemicals” list from which EPA drew the first 10 consists of nearly 100 chemicals that present significant potential risk.

He added:

“What is most important is that EPA gets started, so that it can complete risk evaluations of the first 10 and move on to the next.”

The amendments to TSCA, which are the reason for this important EPA’s action, passed Congress by an overwhelming margin (i.e., 403-12 in the House and unanimous consent in the Senate.) I’m hopeful that the bi-partisan support for the law will shield it attack when the Trump Administration takes office in January.

 

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2gLtYo5

Good for them! They beat Congress’ deadline by 20 days.

That’s the first thing that came to mind yesterday when I read EPA’s announcement about the first 10 chemicals it’s selected for risk evaluations. EPA’s announcement is the first major milestone established by Congress when it passed sweeping changes earlier this year to the Toxic Substances Control Act. One provision of the law (Section 2605(b)(2)(A)) directed EPA to select 10 chemical substances from its 2014 “TSCA Work Plan for Chemical Assessments” and begin risk evaluations on them no later than 180 days after the law was enacted (i.e., December 19, 2016.)

The second thing I did was look at the list of 10. It includes super hazardous chemicals used in consumer products (e.g., methylene chloride, n-methylpyrrolidone (both used as paint strippers) as well as   tetrachloroethylene (PERC), trichloroethylene (TCE), and 1-Bromopropane. All of these have significant worker exposure. The list also includes asbestos—the deadly mineral that has long served as the poster child for why a new chemical safety law was needed.  President Obama explained it this way when he signed the bill in June:

“…the system was so complex, so burdensome that our country hasn’t even been able to uphold a ban on asbestos –a known carcinogen that kills as many as 10,000 Americans every year. I think a lot of Americans would be shocked by that.”

Following EPA’s announcement yesterday, Andy Igrejas, Director of Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families said:

“We support EPA’s choice of chemicals. The list they announced today is a strong one and appropriate EPA action will strengthen public health and environmental safety. We are particularly glad to see asbestos included on the list. The EPA’s inability to ban asbestos under the old law was a primary catalyst for the recent reforms. Asbestos is a major piece of unfinished business for the agency.”

So, what happens next?

EPA has six months to issue a document explaining the scope of its risk evaluation. Congress directed EPA to include in the scoping document information about exposure to the chemical, conditions of use, and the potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulations. The statute specifically mentions infants, children, pregnant women, workers, and the elderly as examples of susceptible subpopulations.

Congress also set a deadline for completing the actual risk evaluations. For each of these ten chemicals, EPA must publish its completed risk evaluation within three years of yesterday’s announcement. During that time period, EPA must publish a draft risk evaluation and allow public comment on it.

A risk evaluation, however, does not itself protect the public. If EPA’s evaluation determines that the chemical presents an unreasonable risk to humans and the environment, the agency must mitigate that risk within two years. The mitigation approaches, such as restricted use of the chemical or a phase-out of its use, would be subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking.

Environmental Defense Fund lead senior scientist Richard Denison put yesterday’s EPA announcement in perspective:

“…EPA’s issuance of this list in advance of the statutory deadline next month is a welcome sign of timely implementation of the new law. While not every chemical that everyone may have wanted is included among the first 10, that is because there are many more than 10 chemicals that need far greater scrutiny as to their safety.  Indeed, the longer “Work Plan Chemicals” list from which EPA drew the first 10 consists of nearly 100 chemicals that present significant potential risk.

He added:

“What is most important is that EPA gets started, so that it can complete risk evaluations of the first 10 and move on to the next.”

The amendments to TSCA, which are the reason for this important EPA’s action, passed Congress by an overwhelming margin (i.e., 403-12 in the House and unanimous consent in the Senate.) I’m hopeful that the bi-partisan support for the law will shield it attack when the Trump Administration takes office in January.

 

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2gLtYo5

Hurricane risk to US northeast coast

The northeastern coast of the United States could be hit by more frequent and more powerful hurricanes in the future, according to research published in the journal Scientific Reports on November 23, 2016.

The study found that, due to shifting weather patterns, hurricanes have gradually moved northwards from the western Caribbean toward northern North America over the past few hundred years.

The reason for this change in the hurricane track, the researchers suggest, is the expansion of atmospheric circulation belts driven by increasing carbon dioxide emissions.

New York and other major cities along the northeast coast could come under a growing threat from these severe storms and need to be better prepared for their potential impact, the researchers said. Dr. Lisa Baldini of Durham University is the study’s lead author. She said in a statement:

Our research shows that the hurricane risk to the northeastern coast of the United States is increasing as hurricanes track further north.

Since the 19th century this shift was largely driven by man-made emissions and if these emissions continue as expected this will result in more frequent and powerful storms affecting the financial and population centers of the northeastern United States.

Damage at Union Beach in New Jersey from Hurricane Sandy. In 2012, Hurricane Sandy struck the Caribbean and much of the eastern seaboard of the United States, stretching as far north as Canada. At least 233 people died as a result of the storm. Image via Devin Matthew Toperek

The researchers say that rising amounts of atmospheric CO2 have expanded a pattern of circulating air in the Earth’s tropical belt called the Hadley cell, which is pushing hurricane tracks further north, away from the western Caribbean towards the northeastern U.S. According to the researchers:

This suggests that from the late 19th century, manmade emissions have become the main driver behind shifting hurricane tracks by altering the position of global weather systems.

If future trends in carbon dioxide and industrial aerosol emissions continue as expected, hurricanes could shift even further northward, exacerbating the risk to the northeast coast of the United States.

Hurricane Sandy on October 30, 2012. Image via NASA.

For the study, the scientists reconstructed hurricane rainfall for the western Caribbean dating back 450 years. Do do this they analyxed the chemical composition of a stalagmite collected from a cave in southern Belize in Central America.

They found that the average number of hurricanes at the Belize site decreased over time. When the hurricane history of Belize was compared with documentary hurricane records from places such as Bermuda and Florida, this information showed that Atlantic hurricanes were moving to the north rather than decreasing in total numbers.

Although natural warming over the centuries has had some impact on shifting hurricane tracks, the researchers found a marked decrease in hurricane activity in the western Caribbean coinciding with the late 19th century industrial boom associated with increasing carbon dioxide and sulphate aerosol emissions to the atmosphere.

The researchers said that initial regional cooling of the Northern Hemisphere due to the increased aerosol emissions from industrialization should have pushed the hurricane tracks southward. But instead, rising amounts of atmospheric carbon dioxide overrode this effect by expanding the Hadley cell – a pattern of circulating air in the Earth’s tropical belt – pushing hurricane tracks further north, away from the western Caribbean towards the northeastern United States.

Enjoying EarthSky? Sign up for our free daily newsletter today!

Bottom line: Research published in Scientific Reports on November 23, 2016 suggests that the northeastern coast of the United States could be hit by more frequent and more powerful hurricanes in the future.

Read more from Durham University

from EarthSky http://ift.tt/2g7Klvm

The northeastern coast of the United States could be hit by more frequent and more powerful hurricanes in the future, according to research published in the journal Scientific Reports on November 23, 2016.

The study found that, due to shifting weather patterns, hurricanes have gradually moved northwards from the western Caribbean toward northern North America over the past few hundred years.

The reason for this change in the hurricane track, the researchers suggest, is the expansion of atmospheric circulation belts driven by increasing carbon dioxide emissions.

New York and other major cities along the northeast coast could come under a growing threat from these severe storms and need to be better prepared for their potential impact, the researchers said. Dr. Lisa Baldini of Durham University is the study’s lead author. She said in a statement:

Our research shows that the hurricane risk to the northeastern coast of the United States is increasing as hurricanes track further north.

Since the 19th century this shift was largely driven by man-made emissions and if these emissions continue as expected this will result in more frequent and powerful storms affecting the financial and population centers of the northeastern United States.

Damage at Union Beach in New Jersey from Hurricane Sandy. In 2012, Hurricane Sandy struck the Caribbean and much of the eastern seaboard of the United States, stretching as far north as Canada. At least 233 people died as a result of the storm. Image via Devin Matthew Toperek

The researchers say that rising amounts of atmospheric CO2 have expanded a pattern of circulating air in the Earth’s tropical belt called the Hadley cell, which is pushing hurricane tracks further north, away from the western Caribbean towards the northeastern U.S. According to the researchers:

This suggests that from the late 19th century, manmade emissions have become the main driver behind shifting hurricane tracks by altering the position of global weather systems.

If future trends in carbon dioxide and industrial aerosol emissions continue as expected, hurricanes could shift even further northward, exacerbating the risk to the northeast coast of the United States.

Hurricane Sandy on October 30, 2012. Image via NASA.

For the study, the scientists reconstructed hurricane rainfall for the western Caribbean dating back 450 years. Do do this they analyxed the chemical composition of a stalagmite collected from a cave in southern Belize in Central America.

They found that the average number of hurricanes at the Belize site decreased over time. When the hurricane history of Belize was compared with documentary hurricane records from places such as Bermuda and Florida, this information showed that Atlantic hurricanes were moving to the north rather than decreasing in total numbers.

Although natural warming over the centuries has had some impact on shifting hurricane tracks, the researchers found a marked decrease in hurricane activity in the western Caribbean coinciding with the late 19th century industrial boom associated with increasing carbon dioxide and sulphate aerosol emissions to the atmosphere.

The researchers said that initial regional cooling of the Northern Hemisphere due to the increased aerosol emissions from industrialization should have pushed the hurricane tracks southward. But instead, rising amounts of atmospheric carbon dioxide overrode this effect by expanding the Hadley cell – a pattern of circulating air in the Earth’s tropical belt – pushing hurricane tracks further north, away from the western Caribbean towards the northeastern United States.

Enjoying EarthSky? Sign up for our free daily newsletter today!

Bottom line: Research published in Scientific Reports on November 23, 2016 suggests that the northeastern coast of the United States could be hit by more frequent and more powerful hurricanes in the future.

Read more from Durham University

from EarthSky http://ift.tt/2g7Klvm

Historic Shipwreck Removed from Gowanus Canal Superfund Site

By Natalie Loney

At the bottom of the murky polluted waters of Gowanus Canal rests the remains of a World War II vessel. How did a WW II boat end up in a canal in Brooklyn, NY?

Recent photograph of the shipwreck. (AHRS, 2016)

This shipwreck is all that’s left of a Miami 63-foot Aircraft Rescue Boat. The “Miami’ boats, designed by the Miami Shipbuilding Corporation, were used at sea in WWII to rescue downed pilots and air crew. The boat in the Gowanus was built in 1943 and was used by the U.S. military until about 1963.

Subsequent to its military service as a “crash boat”, the now Gowanus wreck was refurbished and converted into a ferry. Renamed the Point O’Woods V, the boat was used as a ferry service to Fire Island from 1963 until 1985. In around 1989, the boat became the Kokkomokko and was used as a houseboat in the Bronx until around 2003.

After suffering ice damage, the boat was salvaged and towed to the Gowanus Canal where it became a floating arts and community services space called the Empty Vessel Project. In 2006 the boat, now renamed the Green Anchor Yacht (or more commonly the SS GAY), was used as an arts area, houseboat, and a “queer and trans-friendly space.” It’s believed that the SS GAY sank sometime in 2009.

63’ Aircraft Rescue Boat operating at high speed. (Buhler, 2008)

On October 24, 2016, as part of EPA’s overall plan to clean up the Gowanus Canal, contractors began removing debris from the Gowanus Canal 4^th Street turning basin. Unfortunately, the SS GAY was too far gone to be salvaged. Bits and pieces of the vessel where among the first items removed from the canal. The material recovered from the canal was sorted into recyclable and general landfill categories. Hopefully the metal parts of the SS GAY will be recycled into another use and the WW II crash boat will live on.

For more about the Gowanus Canal shipwreck, see “IDENTIFICATION AND HISTORICAL ASSESSMENT OF “TARGET 31a” 4th STREET BASIN, GOWANUS CANAL SUPERFUND SITE, BROOKLYN, NEW YORK”, William Jason Flatt, PE and Michael Audin, RPA, Archaeology & Historic Resource Services, LLC.

 

About the Author: Natalie Loney is a community involvement coordinator in New York City. She has been in Public Affairs since 1995.

from The EPA Blog http://ift.tt/2g7ovYS

By Natalie Loney

At the bottom of the murky polluted waters of Gowanus Canal rests the remains of a World War II vessel. How did a WW II boat end up in a canal in Brooklyn, NY?

Recent photograph of the shipwreck. (AHRS, 2016)

This shipwreck is all that’s left of a Miami 63-foot Aircraft Rescue Boat. The “Miami’ boats, designed by the Miami Shipbuilding Corporation, were used at sea in WWII to rescue downed pilots and air crew. The boat in the Gowanus was built in 1943 and was used by the U.S. military until about 1963.

Subsequent to its military service as a “crash boat”, the now Gowanus wreck was refurbished and converted into a ferry. Renamed the Point O’Woods V, the boat was used as a ferry service to Fire Island from 1963 until 1985. In around 1989, the boat became the Kokkomokko and was used as a houseboat in the Bronx until around 2003.

After suffering ice damage, the boat was salvaged and towed to the Gowanus Canal where it became a floating arts and community services space called the Empty Vessel Project. In 2006 the boat, now renamed the Green Anchor Yacht (or more commonly the SS GAY), was used as an arts area, houseboat, and a “queer and trans-friendly space.” It’s believed that the SS GAY sank sometime in 2009.

63’ Aircraft Rescue Boat operating at high speed. (Buhler, 2008)

On October 24, 2016, as part of EPA’s overall plan to clean up the Gowanus Canal, contractors began removing debris from the Gowanus Canal 4^th Street turning basin. Unfortunately, the SS GAY was too far gone to be salvaged. Bits and pieces of the vessel where among the first items removed from the canal. The material recovered from the canal was sorted into recyclable and general landfill categories. Hopefully the metal parts of the SS GAY will be recycled into another use and the WW II crash boat will live on.

For more about the Gowanus Canal shipwreck, see “IDENTIFICATION AND HISTORICAL ASSESSMENT OF “TARGET 31a” 4th STREET BASIN, GOWANUS CANAL SUPERFUND SITE, BROOKLYN, NEW YORK”, William Jason Flatt, PE and Michael Audin, RPA, Archaeology & Historic Resource Services, LLC.

 

About the Author: Natalie Loney is a community involvement coordinator in New York City. She has been in Public Affairs since 1995.

from The EPA Blog http://ift.tt/2g7ovYS

Bracing for President Trump [Page 3.14]

The election of Donald Trump to the Presidency of the U.S. caught nearly everyone by surprise, and fingers were immediately pointed in all directions as the election’s losers looked to lay blame. Chad Orzel offers one relevant narrative: “There are a lot of people who feel like they’re being screwed by a system run for the benefit of people in big cities on the coasts who sneer at them as ignorant, racist hicks.” Ethan Siegel extends an olive branch on Starts With a Bang, saying “we all have our biases, even if we ourselves are scientists,” and encourages EVERYONE to accept the responsibility of becoming more informed in a political climate that drips with misinformation and emotional spin.

On Denialism Blog, Mark Hoofnagle examines the conspiracist worldview and what we might expect from a conspiracist White House, noting “we now have a president and vice president elect who have conspiratorial views on vaccines, evolution and climate change, rejecting, effectively, the most important public health intervention of all time, the underpinning of all modern biology, and arguably the greatest threat to human survival on Earth.” Meanwhile, on The Pump Handle, Kim Krisberg sounds a scientific battle cry, writing “public health has plenty of practice confronting and overcoming powerfully entrenched interests for the greater good. Just ask Big Tobacco.”

Finally, John DuPuis has started to document the damage done by Trump to important scientific issues, such as vaccination. On Respectful Insolence, Orac writes “it’s no surprise that antivaxers are very happy about the election of Donald Trump, and they hope to get something out of it.” The true consequences of Trump’s presidency remain to be seen, but his win is a wake-up call to advocates of science and social justice. We must remain vigilant, and we must remember that without effective outreach and communication, we will lose. As Chad Orzel notes, the fight going forward “involves working to treat everyone with respect and decency and empathy,” and not merely casting stones at those who think differently.

See also:

Myron Ebell, Evil Arch Climate Uber Villain on Stoat

Clinton-Trump Gap in Key States on Greg Laden’s Blog

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2gygA7I

The election of Donald Trump to the Presidency of the U.S. caught nearly everyone by surprise, and fingers were immediately pointed in all directions as the election’s losers looked to lay blame. Chad Orzel offers one relevant narrative: “There are a lot of people who feel like they’re being screwed by a system run for the benefit of people in big cities on the coasts who sneer at them as ignorant, racist hicks.” Ethan Siegel extends an olive branch on Starts With a Bang, saying “we all have our biases, even if we ourselves are scientists,” and encourages EVERYONE to accept the responsibility of becoming more informed in a political climate that drips with misinformation and emotional spin.

On Denialism Blog, Mark Hoofnagle examines the conspiracist worldview and what we might expect from a conspiracist White House, noting “we now have a president and vice president elect who have conspiratorial views on vaccines, evolution and climate change, rejecting, effectively, the most important public health intervention of all time, the underpinning of all modern biology, and arguably the greatest threat to human survival on Earth.” Meanwhile, on The Pump Handle, Kim Krisberg sounds a scientific battle cry, writing “public health has plenty of practice confronting and overcoming powerfully entrenched interests for the greater good. Just ask Big Tobacco.”

Finally, John DuPuis has started to document the damage done by Trump to important scientific issues, such as vaccination. On Respectful Insolence, Orac writes “it’s no surprise that antivaxers are very happy about the election of Donald Trump, and they hope to get something out of it.” The true consequences of Trump’s presidency remain to be seen, but his win is a wake-up call to advocates of science and social justice. We must remain vigilant, and we must remember that without effective outreach and communication, we will lose. As Chad Orzel notes, the fight going forward “involves working to treat everyone with respect and decency and empathy,” and not merely casting stones at those who think differently.

See also:

Myron Ebell, Evil Arch Climate Uber Villain on Stoat

Clinton-Trump Gap in Key States on Greg Laden’s Blog

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2gygA7I

Even after the Rana Plaza disaster it is hard to get international clothing brands to do the right thing [The Pump Handle]

A new report by four leading workers’ rights group shows just how hard it is to get international clothing brands to fix problems in their global supply chains despite the fact that 1,100 workers were killed in an instant in an unsafe garment factory in Bangladesh.

Three and a half years after the Rana Plaza building collapsed in Dhaka, Bangladesh, five major clothing brands – Walmart, Gap, VF, Target and Hudson’s Bay – were found to have continuing hazards and dangerous delays in fixing them.  What’s worse is that one of the three international inspection programs in Bangladesh – the Alliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety – has downplayed the problems by moving the due date for hazard correction to July 2018 and then claiming hazardous factories are “on track” to be safe by then.

“Dangerous Delays on Worker Safety” was issued in November by the International Labor Rights Forum, Workers Rights Consortium, Clean Clothes Campaign and Maquila Solidarity Network.  The response of the Alliance was reported in The Guardian (UK) newspaper.

The report looked at 175 garment factories in Bangladesh that are part of international auditing programs – The Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety and the Alliance are the two private sector initiatives, while the International Labor Organization is working with the national Bangladesh government.  The report found that of this sample of 175 factory buildings, 47% have major, uncorrected structural problems; 62% lack viable fire exits, and 62% do not have a properly functioning fire alarm system.

Of these factories, 102 plants are producing for Walmart; 37 factories are producing for the Gap; 36 factories are producing for VF Corporation (a holding company which owns multiple brands); 22 factories are producing for Target; and 6 factories are producing for the Hudson Bay company.

The 12-page report points out that:

Any of the hazards in these categories could be the cause of injury or death to workers. Structural problems that factories in the sample have failed to address including loads in multi-story factories heavier than the floors can reliably bear, cracks in beams holding up the floors, over-stressed structural columns, and similar deficiencies. Fire exit deficiencies include stairwells discharging inside buildings rather than leading outside to safety, stairwells lacking fire-rated doors, exit routes compromised by unsealed openings that would allow smoke to enter during a fire, and related issues. Problems with fire alarm systems involved delayed installation of a system or the installation of a system that does not meet standards.

Most of these factories (96% according to the report) were initially inspected more than two years ago, and have approximately 280,000 garment workers in buildings that are unsafe.

These 175 Alliance-covered factories also produce for brands that are covered by the Accord, and this overlap allow researchers to use Accord data to evaluate the status of these dual-covered factories.  At the same time, the Accord reports that 1,400 factories, or 85% of the factories it covers (including most in the 175-factory sample) are “behind schedule” in making repairs of hazards that were identified years ago.

The Accord, to its credit, at least plainly states that the original due dates for hazard corrections have been missed (“behind schedule”), and it provides detailed reports on its website on the status of each identified hazard in inspected factories.  The Alliance, on the other hand, does not provide public factory-by-factory progress reports.

Moreover, sometime this year, the Alliance decided to push the goalposts back for hazard corrections from the original dates (immediately for severe hazards to no more than several months for the most complex correction) to July 2018 when the Alliance will “sunset” or go out of existence.  In the meantime, factories that should have corrected hazards in 2015, but failed to do so, are now considered to be “on track” by the Alliance, which says it is “confident” that the hazards will be addressed 19 months from now, five years after the Alliance began.

The 26 brands that make up the Alliance are all American or Canadian clothing companies.

Why the delays that threaten so many workers?

The underlying reasons why hazard correction have not occurred on schedule include the failure of the international clothing brands to meet their promises and obligations to provide financial resources to their suppliers to fix unsafe factories; the failure of the international funding mechanism to reach factory owners who need loans; and the “itchy feet” of international brands to continue roaming the world for new production locations.

Even under the terms of Accord, which requires signatory brands to ensure that owners of supplier factories have the financial resources required to correct hazards, international clothing companies have failed to provide the funds needed for hazard correction.  The Alliance signatory brands do not have any requirement to assist their suppliers with necessary funds.

In fact, today – three years after Rana Plaza – the brands are paying their suppliers in Bangladesh less per-unit-produced than they paid them at the time of the disaster.

Moreover, few clothing brands have offered long-term orders to their suppliers, so that factory owners will feel able to repay large bank loans with ongoing orders.  The “sweatshop business model” of short-term contracts at the lowest possible price remains in place and ever-dominant.

An international loan fund organized by the International Labor Organization and the World Bank has failed to provide the needed funding as well, according to a recent World Bank study .

Among the reasons for this failure are rampant corruption in the Bangladesh banking sector when funds they receive at 3-4% interest from the World Bank are offered to local factory owners at 10% or higher interest rates – and only offered to existing clients.

The third reason for delays in hazard correction is another aspect of the global supply chain sweatshop business model: the relentless search by transnational corporations to find the lowest production costs and highest profit rates, no matter the social and environmental impacts on the workers and countries involved.

Earlier this year, Rubana Huq, Managing Director of the Mohammadi Group, comprising of 8 garment factories in Bangladesh, spoke at the Chowdhury Center for Bangladesh Studies at the University of California at Berkeley.  Ms. Huq reported that she has already been approached by clothing brands to continue being a supplier – but not with factories in Bangladesh, the brands wanted her company to set up and manage factories in East Africa where wages and compliance costs are even lower than Bangladesh.

How progress is made

It was the world-wide outcry and outrage following the industrial homicide of 1,100 people at Rana Plaza that forced 215+ international clothing brands to sign onto the Accord, and motivated the 26 US/Canadian brands to set up the competing Alliance, which has been forced to match the Accord in a “me-too” arrangement in many – but not all – aspects of hazard identification, hazard correction, worker participation and OHS and management assistance to factory owners.

Progress has been registered, and it should be appreciated.  More than 3,700 garment factories in Bangladesh producing for the international apparel market have had competent safety inspections and the results publicly posted on the internet. Many of the 150,000 identified hazards have been eliminated, and those that have not been fixed are now the source of a new public outcry.

This focus on worker health and safety, led by the Accord, is unprecedented for any global supply chain, in any country, and in any product sector.  The example of independent, competent inspections; public reporting of the results; mandatory hazard correction; and worker participation and OHS training is one that could and should be replicated elsewhere in the global economy.

There is, of course, work to do.  As the report notes:

This partial progress is positive, because it makes factories at least somewhat safer. However, these brands did not promise in the wake of the Rana Plaza collapse to make their supplier factories somewhat safer; they promised to make them safe – and that standard has been very clearly defined in time-bound action plans for each factory.  (emphasis in original.)

Part of the work needed to improve working conditions in Bangladesh is to keep holding the brands’ feet to the fire to meet the promises they made to garment workers in Bangladesh.  Part of the work needed is to demand a change of the dominant sweatshop business model of global supply chains.  Part of the work needed is replace the ineffective and corrupted “corporate social responsibility” monitoring with independent, competent auditing that is publicly reported and carries mandatory hazard corrections and involves meaningful worker participation.

A tall order, but the only way to effectively protect garment workers in Bangladesh, or in East Africa, or in New York City and Los Angeles.

Garrett Brown is a certified industrial hygienist who worked for Cal/OSHA for 20 years as a field Compliance officer and then served as Special Assistant to the Chief of the Division before retiring in 2014.  He has also been the volunteer Coordinator of the Maquiladora Health & Safety Support Network since 1993.  He has made five trips to Bangladesh to assist with worker safety projects since 2014.

 

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2g7gD9M

A new report by four leading workers’ rights group shows just how hard it is to get international clothing brands to fix problems in their global supply chains despite the fact that 1,100 workers were killed in an instant in an unsafe garment factory in Bangladesh.

Three and a half years after the Rana Plaza building collapsed in Dhaka, Bangladesh, five major clothing brands – Walmart, Gap, VF, Target and Hudson’s Bay – were found to have continuing hazards and dangerous delays in fixing them.  What’s worse is that one of the three international inspection programs in Bangladesh – the Alliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety – has downplayed the problems by moving the due date for hazard correction to July 2018 and then claiming hazardous factories are “on track” to be safe by then.

“Dangerous Delays on Worker Safety” was issued in November by the International Labor Rights Forum, Workers Rights Consortium, Clean Clothes Campaign and Maquila Solidarity Network.  The response of the Alliance was reported in The Guardian (UK) newspaper.

The report looked at 175 garment factories in Bangladesh that are part of international auditing programs – The Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety and the Alliance are the two private sector initiatives, while the International Labor Organization is working with the national Bangladesh government.  The report found that of this sample of 175 factory buildings, 47% have major, uncorrected structural problems; 62% lack viable fire exits, and 62% do not have a properly functioning fire alarm system.

Of these factories, 102 plants are producing for Walmart; 37 factories are producing for the Gap; 36 factories are producing for VF Corporation (a holding company which owns multiple brands); 22 factories are producing for Target; and 6 factories are producing for the Hudson Bay company.

The 12-page report points out that:

Any of the hazards in these categories could be the cause of injury or death to workers. Structural problems that factories in the sample have failed to address including loads in multi-story factories heavier than the floors can reliably bear, cracks in beams holding up the floors, over-stressed structural columns, and similar deficiencies. Fire exit deficiencies include stairwells discharging inside buildings rather than leading outside to safety, stairwells lacking fire-rated doors, exit routes compromised by unsealed openings that would allow smoke to enter during a fire, and related issues. Problems with fire alarm systems involved delayed installation of a system or the installation of a system that does not meet standards.

Most of these factories (96% according to the report) were initially inspected more than two years ago, and have approximately 280,000 garment workers in buildings that are unsafe.

These 175 Alliance-covered factories also produce for brands that are covered by the Accord, and this overlap allow researchers to use Accord data to evaluate the status of these dual-covered factories.  At the same time, the Accord reports that 1,400 factories, or 85% of the factories it covers (including most in the 175-factory sample) are “behind schedule” in making repairs of hazards that were identified years ago.

The Accord, to its credit, at least plainly states that the original due dates for hazard corrections have been missed (“behind schedule”), and it provides detailed reports on its website on the status of each identified hazard in inspected factories.  The Alliance, on the other hand, does not provide public factory-by-factory progress reports.

Moreover, sometime this year, the Alliance decided to push the goalposts back for hazard corrections from the original dates (immediately for severe hazards to no more than several months for the most complex correction) to July 2018 when the Alliance will “sunset” or go out of existence.  In the meantime, factories that should have corrected hazards in 2015, but failed to do so, are now considered to be “on track” by the Alliance, which says it is “confident” that the hazards will be addressed 19 months from now, five years after the Alliance began.

The 26 brands that make up the Alliance are all American or Canadian clothing companies.

Why the delays that threaten so many workers?

The underlying reasons why hazard correction have not occurred on schedule include the failure of the international clothing brands to meet their promises and obligations to provide financial resources to their suppliers to fix unsafe factories; the failure of the international funding mechanism to reach factory owners who need loans; and the “itchy feet” of international brands to continue roaming the world for new production locations.

Even under the terms of Accord, which requires signatory brands to ensure that owners of supplier factories have the financial resources required to correct hazards, international clothing companies have failed to provide the funds needed for hazard correction.  The Alliance signatory brands do not have any requirement to assist their suppliers with necessary funds.

In fact, today – three years after Rana Plaza – the brands are paying their suppliers in Bangladesh less per-unit-produced than they paid them at the time of the disaster.

Moreover, few clothing brands have offered long-term orders to their suppliers, so that factory owners will feel able to repay large bank loans with ongoing orders.  The “sweatshop business model” of short-term contracts at the lowest possible price remains in place and ever-dominant.

An international loan fund organized by the International Labor Organization and the World Bank has failed to provide the needed funding as well, according to a recent World Bank study .

Among the reasons for this failure are rampant corruption in the Bangladesh banking sector when funds they receive at 3-4% interest from the World Bank are offered to local factory owners at 10% or higher interest rates – and only offered to existing clients.

The third reason for delays in hazard correction is another aspect of the global supply chain sweatshop business model: the relentless search by transnational corporations to find the lowest production costs and highest profit rates, no matter the social and environmental impacts on the workers and countries involved.

Earlier this year, Rubana Huq, Managing Director of the Mohammadi Group, comprising of 8 garment factories in Bangladesh, spoke at the Chowdhury Center for Bangladesh Studies at the University of California at Berkeley.  Ms. Huq reported that she has already been approached by clothing brands to continue being a supplier – but not with factories in Bangladesh, the brands wanted her company to set up and manage factories in East Africa where wages and compliance costs are even lower than Bangladesh.

How progress is made

It was the world-wide outcry and outrage following the industrial homicide of 1,100 people at Rana Plaza that forced 215+ international clothing brands to sign onto the Accord, and motivated the 26 US/Canadian brands to set up the competing Alliance, which has been forced to match the Accord in a “me-too” arrangement in many – but not all – aspects of hazard identification, hazard correction, worker participation and OHS and management assistance to factory owners.

Progress has been registered, and it should be appreciated.  More than 3,700 garment factories in Bangladesh producing for the international apparel market have had competent safety inspections and the results publicly posted on the internet. Many of the 150,000 identified hazards have been eliminated, and those that have not been fixed are now the source of a new public outcry.

This focus on worker health and safety, led by the Accord, is unprecedented for any global supply chain, in any country, and in any product sector.  The example of independent, competent inspections; public reporting of the results; mandatory hazard correction; and worker participation and OHS training is one that could and should be replicated elsewhere in the global economy.

There is, of course, work to do.  As the report notes:

This partial progress is positive, because it makes factories at least somewhat safer. However, these brands did not promise in the wake of the Rana Plaza collapse to make their supplier factories somewhat safer; they promised to make them safe – and that standard has been very clearly defined in time-bound action plans for each factory.  (emphasis in original.)

Part of the work needed to improve working conditions in Bangladesh is to keep holding the brands’ feet to the fire to meet the promises they made to garment workers in Bangladesh.  Part of the work needed is to demand a change of the dominant sweatshop business model of global supply chains.  Part of the work needed is replace the ineffective and corrupted “corporate social responsibility” monitoring with independent, competent auditing that is publicly reported and carries mandatory hazard corrections and involves meaningful worker participation.

A tall order, but the only way to effectively protect garment workers in Bangladesh, or in East Africa, or in New York City and Los Angeles.

Garrett Brown is a certified industrial hygienist who worked for Cal/OSHA for 20 years as a field Compliance officer and then served as Special Assistant to the Chief of the Division before retiring in 2014.  He has also been the volunteer Coordinator of the Maquiladora Health & Safety Support Network since 1993.  He has made five trips to Bangladesh to assist with worker safety projects since 2014.

 

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2g7gD9M

Aquatic Robotics: Underwater Glider Helps Monitor Great Lakes Water Quality

By Tom Hollenhorst and Paul McKinney

Preparing to deploy the Nokomis

It’s always exciting to be on a boat heading out under the Duluth lift bridge towards the middle of Lake Superior, but last month’s trip was especially thrilling. Our mission was to rendezvous with EPA’s autonomous Slocum glider, the Nokomis.

The glider was returning to the Duluth area after a nearly 40-day deployment in which it travelled over 1000 kilometers across Lake Superior. Acquired in 2014, the glider complements the EPA’s Great Lakes science initiatives by providing high resolution observations of temperature and concentrations of chlorophyll-a, colored dissolved organic matter, and suspended matter. These are important measurements because they tell us about the relative health and productivity of the lake.  These types of data are especially useful if they are collected continuously over a period of time across an area of interest, like the data collected by gliders. And even more useful if the measurements are made in conjunction with other monitoring efforts and data (including remote sensing data).  In addition to continuously collecting data every half second, the gliders can also be out in the lake during storms and adverse conditions, when we wouldn’t want to put lives at risk.

Named after Joshua Slocum, the first person to single-handedly sail around the world, the glider propels itself by changing its buoyancy and adjusting the position of its forward battery pack. The buoyancy changes cause it to rise and fall, and its wings turn the vertical motion into forward motion. This method of propulsion is very battery efficient, allowing the glider to perform extraordinarily long missions. In fact, a Slocum Glider piloted by students at Rutgers University crossed the Atlantic Ocean in 2009. That trip took 220 days. As a result of its unique saw-toothed path, our glider, Nokomis completed over 7000 vertical profiles as it made its way back towards Duluth this summer.

The Nokomis (yellow) in action.

Throughout its mission, Nokomis regularly sent in snippets of the data it was collecting while receiving updated instructions via the satellite phone in its tail. The regular contact provided our team opportunities to pilot the glider towards areas of interest that we had observed in satellite images of the lake’s surface. By combining the remotely sensed data with the high resolution glider data, we expect to increase our understanding of exchange processes between nearshore and offshore areas of the lake. The work is a collaboration with EPA’s Great Lakes National Program Office and is part of its collaborative science monitoring initiative.

 

To learn more about our glider work and the recent post-mission recovery, check out the Duluth News Tribune article Gliders provide in-depth scientific data on Lake Superior.

 

About the Authors:

Tom Hollenhorst is an Ecologist at EPA’s Mid-Continent Ecology Division.  He’s been studying the landscapes and watershed in and around the Great lakes for nearly two decades.  He’s especially interested in understanding watershed-nearshore-offshore connections and the transfer of energy and nutrients between them.

Paul McKinney is a National Research Council (NRC) postdoctoral research associate based at EPA’s Mid-Continent Ecology Division. His research is focused on understanding the processes linking nearshore and offshore areas of the Great Lakes.

from The EPA Blog http://ift.tt/2gxVs1t

By Tom Hollenhorst and Paul McKinney

Preparing to deploy the Nokomis

It’s always exciting to be on a boat heading out under the Duluth lift bridge towards the middle of Lake Superior, but last month’s trip was especially thrilling. Our mission was to rendezvous with EPA’s autonomous Slocum glider, the Nokomis.

The glider was returning to the Duluth area after a nearly 40-day deployment in which it travelled over 1000 kilometers across Lake Superior. Acquired in 2014, the glider complements the EPA’s Great Lakes science initiatives by providing high resolution observations of temperature and concentrations of chlorophyll-a, colored dissolved organic matter, and suspended matter. These are important measurements because they tell us about the relative health and productivity of the lake.  These types of data are especially useful if they are collected continuously over a period of time across an area of interest, like the data collected by gliders. And even more useful if the measurements are made in conjunction with other monitoring efforts and data (including remote sensing data).  In addition to continuously collecting data every half second, the gliders can also be out in the lake during storms and adverse conditions, when we wouldn’t want to put lives at risk.

Named after Joshua Slocum, the first person to single-handedly sail around the world, the glider propels itself by changing its buoyancy and adjusting the position of its forward battery pack. The buoyancy changes cause it to rise and fall, and its wings turn the vertical motion into forward motion. This method of propulsion is very battery efficient, allowing the glider to perform extraordinarily long missions. In fact, a Slocum Glider piloted by students at Rutgers University crossed the Atlantic Ocean in 2009. That trip took 220 days. As a result of its unique saw-toothed path, our glider, Nokomis completed over 7000 vertical profiles as it made its way back towards Duluth this summer.

The Nokomis (yellow) in action.

Throughout its mission, Nokomis regularly sent in snippets of the data it was collecting while receiving updated instructions via the satellite phone in its tail. The regular contact provided our team opportunities to pilot the glider towards areas of interest that we had observed in satellite images of the lake’s surface. By combining the remotely sensed data with the high resolution glider data, we expect to increase our understanding of exchange processes between nearshore and offshore areas of the lake. The work is a collaboration with EPA’s Great Lakes National Program Office and is part of its collaborative science monitoring initiative.

 

To learn more about our glider work and the recent post-mission recovery, check out the Duluth News Tribune article Gliders provide in-depth scientific data on Lake Superior.

 

About the Authors:

Tom Hollenhorst is an Ecologist at EPA’s Mid-Continent Ecology Division.  He’s been studying the landscapes and watershed in and around the Great lakes for nearly two decades.  He’s especially interested in understanding watershed-nearshore-offshore connections and the transfer of energy and nutrients between them.

Paul McKinney is a National Research Council (NRC) postdoctoral research associate based at EPA’s Mid-Continent Ecology Division. His research is focused on understanding the processes linking nearshore and offshore areas of the Great Lakes.

from The EPA Blog http://ift.tt/2gxVs1t

3-D Printing: Evolving for Tomorrow Today through Additive Manufacturing

By Air Force Maj. Hank Pflugradt
U.S. Transportation Command

SCOTT AIR FORCE BASE, Ill., Nov. 30, 2016 — What if a technology existed that allowed troops at forward operating locations to manufacture aircraft parts, tank treads and ship components, on the spot, anytime, anywhere, at the touch of a button? Is this science fiction or a future reality? Neither. 3-D printing is here, today.

3-D printing is starting to turn the world of logistics on its head. Additive manufacturing, the linking of 3-D printing to the production process, is disrupting the way we think about transportation by reducing manufacturing costs and decentralizing production. In this way, 3-D printing is shortening the global supply chain. It is fundamentally changing the way products are made by enabling manufacturing to move closer to the user and eliminating the need to assemble and transport parts in different locations away from the point of intended use. These changes are decreasing the need for massive physical inventories, shortening the supply chain, slashing costs, and ultimately reducing risk.

An airman holds examples of 3-D printed sign brackets at U.S. Transportation Command’s headquarters at Scott Air Force Base, Ill., Nov. 7, 2016. The Transcom Commander’s Action Group demonstrated a proof of concept by using a 3-D printer to create the brackets. This technology offers nearly limitless possibilities for Transcom’s global deploy, sustain and redeploy enterprise. (Air Force photo)

Conceptually, 3-D printing is quite simple. It requires hardware and software. The hardware consists of a 3-D printer and the raw materials used to “print” an object [e.g. plastic, metal, composite, etc.]. The software includes a digital design file, which contains the 3-D blueprint for the object, and the ability to transmit the item to the 3-D printer. When the hardware and software are paired with the user’s imagination, the possibilities for innovation are endless.

Recently, U.S. Transportation Command’s Commander’s Action Group took initial steps to demonstrate the benefits of this emerging technology. What began as a concept to change the way the command thought about logistics, quickly transformed into the design and 3-D printing of functional brackets to display office signs around the headquarters. Although the objects are small, the proof of concept is enormous.

Through research, the CAG discovered 3-D printing community portals on the internet. These websites allow graphic designers from across the world to upload their 3-D design files for free download and use, including everything from coffee cups to cell-phone cases. Using the free digital blueprints, the CAG began to produce widgets as they calibrated the printer settings.

Their next goal, however, was to print an object that was designed from scratch within Transcom. However, creating such a digital file involved a baseline of technical expertise, which the team did not have at that point. Pausing at this temporary roadblock, they reached out to a freelance digital designer who created and donated a 3-D model of the Transcom symbol.

That individual helped the CAG prove the capability of turning Transcom ideas into 3-D designs, albeit through an external source. This did not stifle innovation, but in fact, fueled it. The ability to design and print an object for practical use was now within reach. The CAG just needed to bridge the gap. Enter the Transcom facility managers.

In addition to repairing and maintaining critical systems within the headquarters building, the Transcom facility managers spend a significant amount of time fashioning metal brackets to hang office signs from the ceiling throughout the headquarters building. They do this because the original brackets were discontinued. Recognizing the opportunity to provide a more effective solution at a much lower cost, the CAG turned to 3-D printing to produce the much-needed sign brackets.

Through Google searches and YouTube tutorials, the CAG downloaded free CAD design software and learned the basics of drafting digital 3-D objects. Within a day, they optimally designed, printed, and load-tested new office sign brackets. Where the old metal brackets cost $2.50 each — not including the time and costs associated with shipping, handling, and modification — the 3-D-printed brackets cost 29 cents each in material, an 88 percent cost savings. Where the old metal brackets took weeks to deliver, the 3-D-printed brackets went from creation to installation in a matter of hours. Although the CAG’s additive manufacturing proof of concept was the first of its kind inside the headquarters, this is not where the story ends, this is where it begins.

Imagine how this concept can be applied to your organization, to the Defense Department, and to the nation. This past July, a Navy MV-22B Osprey successfully completed a 1-hour flight using a flight-critical part made by additive manufacturing techniques. It was equipped with a titanium, 3-D-printed link and fitting assembly for one of its engine nacelles.

Transcom’s 3-D printed bracket is not just a proof of concept. It is a call for innovative thought. It is spurring the collective imagination of the command to think about how this capability will impact the future of transportation and logistics. The science fiction of tomorrow is here today. How we harness it, is up to us.

Follow the Department of Defense on Facebook and Twitter!

———

Disclaimer: The appearance of hyperlinks does not constitute endorsement by the Department of Defense of this website or the information, products or services contained therein. For other than authorized activities such as military exchanges and Morale, Welfare and Recreation sites, the Department of Defense does not exercise any editorial control over the information you may find at these locations. Such links are provided consistent with the stated purpose of this DOD website.

from Armed with Science http://ift.tt/2gxXE9f

By Air Force Maj. Hank Pflugradt
U.S. Transportation Command

SCOTT AIR FORCE BASE, Ill., Nov. 30, 2016 — What if a technology existed that allowed troops at forward operating locations to manufacture aircraft parts, tank treads and ship components, on the spot, anytime, anywhere, at the touch of a button? Is this science fiction or a future reality? Neither. 3-D printing is here, today.

3-D printing is starting to turn the world of logistics on its head. Additive manufacturing, the linking of 3-D printing to the production process, is disrupting the way we think about transportation by reducing manufacturing costs and decentralizing production. In this way, 3-D printing is shortening the global supply chain. It is fundamentally changing the way products are made by enabling manufacturing to move closer to the user and eliminating the need to assemble and transport parts in different locations away from the point of intended use. These changes are decreasing the need for massive physical inventories, shortening the supply chain, slashing costs, and ultimately reducing risk.

An airman holds examples of 3-D printed sign brackets at U.S. Transportation Command’s headquarters at Scott Air Force Base, Ill., Nov. 7, 2016. The Transcom Commander’s Action Group demonstrated a proof of concept by using a 3-D printer to create the brackets. This technology offers nearly limitless possibilities for Transcom’s global deploy, sustain and redeploy enterprise. (Air Force photo)

Conceptually, 3-D printing is quite simple. It requires hardware and software. The hardware consists of a 3-D printer and the raw materials used to “print” an object [e.g. plastic, metal, composite, etc.]. The software includes a digital design file, which contains the 3-D blueprint for the object, and the ability to transmit the item to the 3-D printer. When the hardware and software are paired with the user’s imagination, the possibilities for innovation are endless.

Recently, U.S. Transportation Command’s Commander’s Action Group took initial steps to demonstrate the benefits of this emerging technology. What began as a concept to change the way the command thought about logistics, quickly transformed into the design and 3-D printing of functional brackets to display office signs around the headquarters. Although the objects are small, the proof of concept is enormous.

Through research, the CAG discovered 3-D printing community portals on the internet. These websites allow graphic designers from across the world to upload their 3-D design files for free download and use, including everything from coffee cups to cell-phone cases. Using the free digital blueprints, the CAG began to produce widgets as they calibrated the printer settings.

Their next goal, however, was to print an object that was designed from scratch within Transcom. However, creating such a digital file involved a baseline of technical expertise, which the team did not have at that point. Pausing at this temporary roadblock, they reached out to a freelance digital designer who created and donated a 3-D model of the Transcom symbol.

That individual helped the CAG prove the capability of turning Transcom ideas into 3-D designs, albeit through an external source. This did not stifle innovation, but in fact, fueled it. The ability to design and print an object for practical use was now within reach. The CAG just needed to bridge the gap. Enter the Transcom facility managers.

In addition to repairing and maintaining critical systems within the headquarters building, the Transcom facility managers spend a significant amount of time fashioning metal brackets to hang office signs from the ceiling throughout the headquarters building. They do this because the original brackets were discontinued. Recognizing the opportunity to provide a more effective solution at a much lower cost, the CAG turned to 3-D printing to produce the much-needed sign brackets.

Through Google searches and YouTube tutorials, the CAG downloaded free CAD design software and learned the basics of drafting digital 3-D objects. Within a day, they optimally designed, printed, and load-tested new office sign brackets. Where the old metal brackets cost $2.50 each — not including the time and costs associated with shipping, handling, and modification — the 3-D-printed brackets cost 29 cents each in material, an 88 percent cost savings. Where the old metal brackets took weeks to deliver, the 3-D-printed brackets went from creation to installation in a matter of hours. Although the CAG’s additive manufacturing proof of concept was the first of its kind inside the headquarters, this is not where the story ends, this is where it begins.

Imagine how this concept can be applied to your organization, to the Defense Department, and to the nation. This past July, a Navy MV-22B Osprey successfully completed a 1-hour flight using a flight-critical part made by additive manufacturing techniques. It was equipped with a titanium, 3-D-printed link and fitting assembly for one of its engine nacelles.

Transcom’s 3-D printed bracket is not just a proof of concept. It is a call for innovative thought. It is spurring the collective imagination of the command to think about how this capability will impact the future of transportation and logistics. The science fiction of tomorrow is here today. How we harness it, is up to us.

Follow the Department of Defense on Facebook and Twitter!

———

Disclaimer: The appearance of hyperlinks does not constitute endorsement by the Department of Defense of this website or the information, products or services contained therein. For other than authorized activities such as military exchanges and Morale, Welfare and Recreation sites, the Department of Defense does not exercise any editorial control over the information you may find at these locations. Such links are provided consistent with the stated purpose of this DOD website.

from Armed with Science http://ift.tt/2gxXE9f

Watch for earliest sunsets before solstice

Adrian Strand captured this photo on a beach in northwest England.

The winter solstice is the shortest day. It offers the shortest period of daylight. But the earliest sunsets aren’t on the solstice itself. Instead, no matter where you live on Earth, the earliest sunsets come a couple of weeks before your winter solstice. That means that – if you live at the temperate regions of the Northern Hemisphere – your earliest sunsets are in early to mid-December.

And if you live in the Southern Hemisphere, your earliest sunrises are coming around now. Southern Hemisphere? Click here.

Why isn’t the earliest sunset on the year’s shortest day? To understand it, try thinking about it in terms of solar noon or midday, the time midway between sunrise and sunset, when the sun reaches its highest point for the day.

A clock ticks off exactly 24 hours from one noon to the next. But the actual days – as measured by the spin of the Earth – are rarely exactly 24 hours long.

So the exact time of solar noon, as measured by Earth’s spin, shifts in a seasonal way. If you measured Earth’s spin from one solar noon to the next, you’d find that – around the time of the December solstice – the time period between consecutive solar noons is actually half a minute longer than 24 hours.

So – two weeks before the solstice, for example – the sun reaches its noontime position at 11:52 a.m. local standard time. Two weeks later – on the winter solstice – the sun reaches its noontime position at 11:59 a.m. That’s 7 minutes later.

The later clock time for solar noon also means a later clock time for sunrise and sunset.

The result: earlier sunsets before the winter solstice and increasingly later sunrises for a few weeks after the winter solstice.

The exact date of earliest sunset varies with latitude. But the sequence is always the same. For the Northern Hemisphere, earliest sunset in early December, winter solstice, latest sunrise in early January.

In early December, the Southern Hemisphere is approaching its summer solstice. Sunset on that part of Earth will continue coming later until early July. Photo of sunset with crepuscular rays by Phil Rettke Photography in Ipswich, Queensland, Australia.

Meanwhile, if you’re in the Southern Hemisphere, take nearly everything we say here and apply it to your winter solstice in June. For the Southern Hemisphere, assuming you’re at a mid-temperate latitude, the earliest sunsets come prior to the winter solstice, which is typically around June 21. The latest sunrises occur in late June.

During the month of December, it’s nearly summer in the Southern Hemisphere; the summer solstice comes this month for that hemisphere. So sunsets and sunrises are shifting in a similar way. For both hemispheres, the sequence in summer is: earliest sunrises before the summer solstice, then the summer solstice itself, then latest sunsets after the summer solstice.

As always, things get tricky if you look closely. Assuming you’re at a mid-temperate latitude, the earliest sunset for the Northern Hemisphere – and earliest sunrise for the Southern Hemisphere – come about two weeks before the December solstice, and the latest sunrise/latest sunset happen about two weeks after.

But at the other end of the year, in June and July, the time period is not equivalent. Again assuming a mid-temperate latitude, the earliest sunrise for the Northern Hemisphere – and earliest sunset for the Southern Hemisphere – comes only about one week before the June solstice, and the latest sunset/latest sunrise happens about one week after.

The time difference is due to the fact that the December solstice occurs when Earth is near its perihelion – or closest point to the sun – around which time we’re moving fastest in orbit. Meanwhile, the June solstice occurs when Earth is near aphelion – our farthest point from the sun – around which time we’re moving at our slowest in orbit.

View larger. Computed position of the sun looking eastward at the same time each morning from the Northern Hemisphere. December solstice point at lower right and June solstice point at upper left. Solar days are longer than 24 hours long at the solstices, yet less than 24 hours long at the equinoxes. Roughly midway between a solstice and an equinox, or vice versa, the solar day is exactly 24 hours long.

In short, the earliest sunset/winter solstice/latest sunrise and earliest sunrise/summer solstice/latest sunset phenomena are due to the fact that true solar days are longer than 24 hours long for several weeks before and after the solstices. At and around the solstices, the Earth must rotate farther on its axis for the sun to return to its daily noontime position, primarily because the sun is appreciably north or south of the Earth’s equator.

However, perihelion accentuates the effect around the December solstice, giving a day length of 24 hours 30 seconds. And aphelion lessens the effect around the June solstice, giving a day length of 24 hours 13 seconds.

Bottom line: The earliest sunsets and latest sunrises don’t come on the winter solstice, the shortest day of the year. Instead, earliest sunsets come some weeks before the winter solstice. Latest sunrises come some weeks after it.

Here are more details about the earliest sunsets.

from EarthSky http://ift.tt/1tNt1eN

Adrian Strand captured this photo on a beach in northwest England.

The winter solstice is the shortest day. It offers the shortest period of daylight. But the earliest sunsets aren’t on the solstice itself. Instead, no matter where you live on Earth, the earliest sunsets come a couple of weeks before your winter solstice. That means that – if you live at the temperate regions of the Northern Hemisphere – your earliest sunsets are in early to mid-December.

And if you live in the Southern Hemisphere, your earliest sunrises are coming around now. Southern Hemisphere? Click here.

Why isn’t the earliest sunset on the year’s shortest day? To understand it, try thinking about it in terms of solar noon or midday, the time midway between sunrise and sunset, when the sun reaches its highest point for the day.

A clock ticks off exactly 24 hours from one noon to the next. But the actual days – as measured by the spin of the Earth – are rarely exactly 24 hours long.

So the exact time of solar noon, as measured by Earth’s spin, shifts in a seasonal way. If you measured Earth’s spin from one solar noon to the next, you’d find that – around the time of the December solstice – the time period between consecutive solar noons is actually half a minute longer than 24 hours.

So – two weeks before the solstice, for example – the sun reaches its noontime position at 11:52 a.m. local standard time. Two weeks later – on the winter solstice – the sun reaches its noontime position at 11:59 a.m. That’s 7 minutes later.

The later clock time for solar noon also means a later clock time for sunrise and sunset.

The result: earlier sunsets before the winter solstice and increasingly later sunrises for a few weeks after the winter solstice.

The exact date of earliest sunset varies with latitude. But the sequence is always the same. For the Northern Hemisphere, earliest sunset in early December, winter solstice, latest sunrise in early January.

In early December, the Southern Hemisphere is approaching its summer solstice. Sunset on that part of Earth will continue coming later until early July. Photo of sunset with crepuscular rays by Phil Rettke Photography in Ipswich, Queensland, Australia.

Meanwhile, if you’re in the Southern Hemisphere, take nearly everything we say here and apply it to your winter solstice in June. For the Southern Hemisphere, assuming you’re at a mid-temperate latitude, the earliest sunsets come prior to the winter solstice, which is typically around June 21. The latest sunrises occur in late June.

During the month of December, it’s nearly summer in the Southern Hemisphere; the summer solstice comes this month for that hemisphere. So sunsets and sunrises are shifting in a similar way. For both hemispheres, the sequence in summer is: earliest sunrises before the summer solstice, then the summer solstice itself, then latest sunsets after the summer solstice.

As always, things get tricky if you look closely. Assuming you’re at a mid-temperate latitude, the earliest sunset for the Northern Hemisphere – and earliest sunrise for the Southern Hemisphere – come about two weeks before the December solstice, and the latest sunrise/latest sunset happen about two weeks after.

But at the other end of the year, in June and July, the time period is not equivalent. Again assuming a mid-temperate latitude, the earliest sunrise for the Northern Hemisphere – and earliest sunset for the Southern Hemisphere – comes only about one week before the June solstice, and the latest sunset/latest sunrise happens about one week after.

The time difference is due to the fact that the December solstice occurs when Earth is near its perihelion – or closest point to the sun – around which time we’re moving fastest in orbit. Meanwhile, the June solstice occurs when Earth is near aphelion – our farthest point from the sun – around which time we’re moving at our slowest in orbit.

View larger. Computed position of the sun looking eastward at the same time each morning from the Northern Hemisphere. December solstice point at lower right and June solstice point at upper left. Solar days are longer than 24 hours long at the solstices, yet less than 24 hours long at the equinoxes. Roughly midway between a solstice and an equinox, or vice versa, the solar day is exactly 24 hours long.

In short, the earliest sunset/winter solstice/latest sunrise and earliest sunrise/summer solstice/latest sunset phenomena are due to the fact that true solar days are longer than 24 hours long for several weeks before and after the solstices. At and around the solstices, the Earth must rotate farther on its axis for the sun to return to its daily noontime position, primarily because the sun is appreciably north or south of the Earth’s equator.

However, perihelion accentuates the effect around the December solstice, giving a day length of 24 hours 30 seconds. And aphelion lessens the effect around the June solstice, giving a day length of 24 hours 13 seconds.

Bottom line: The earliest sunsets and latest sunrises don’t come on the winter solstice, the shortest day of the year. Instead, earliest sunsets come some weeks before the winter solstice. Latest sunrises come some weeks after it.

Here are more details about the earliest sunsets.

from EarthSky http://ift.tt/1tNt1eN

Updating TGO OS

This morning, the ExoMars Trace Gas orbiter received an updated ‘operating system’ – the basic software that runs the craft just like the Windows® software that runs a PC.

This week's 'fresh install' is the second such update for TGO since launch, and will include fixes and patches for a number of issues discovered since launch.

Credit: ESA/ATG medialab

We posted a detailed description of the last update, and the procedure for today was substantially similar to that one, done in April.

Today's update activates 3 MB of new code, that was transmitted a few days ago via ESA's 35-m diameter deep-space station at New Norcia. Today's critical action was centered on rebooting the computer, triggering a restart with the new software.

In particular, this OS update will ensure the craft is more robust, especially in the event of any unexpected problems, during the upcoming aerobraking campaign, set to start in March and last until early 2018.

During aerobraking, the craft will skim the wispy tops of the martian atmosphere, causing a tiny amount of drag that will slow TGO and steadily lower it onto the required 400-km science orbit (we'll post more news on aerobraking preparations shortly).

The spacecraft, by the way, is in excellent health.

To date, TGO has only experienced one ‘safe mode’ – when a glitch causes the spacecraft to reboot itself and wait for corrective commands. That happened during preliminary in-flight testing of the main engine, where a faulty configuration was quickly identified and fixed. The craft later performed highly accurate burns of the engine for several deep-space manoeuvres and the Mars orbit insertion.

from Rocket Science http://ift.tt/2fLMrjq
v

This morning, the ExoMars Trace Gas orbiter received an updated ‘operating system’ – the basic software that runs the craft just like the Windows® software that runs a PC.

This week's 'fresh install' is the second such update for TGO since launch, and will include fixes and patches for a number of issues discovered since launch.

Credit: ESA/ATG medialab

We posted a detailed description of the last update, and the procedure for today was substantially similar to that one, done in April.

Today's update activates 3 MB of new code, that was transmitted a few days ago via ESA's 35-m diameter deep-space station at New Norcia. Today's critical action was centered on rebooting the computer, triggering a restart with the new software.

In particular, this OS update will ensure the craft is more robust, especially in the event of any unexpected problems, during the upcoming aerobraking campaign, set to start in March and last until early 2018.

During aerobraking, the craft will skim the wispy tops of the martian atmosphere, causing a tiny amount of drag that will slow TGO and steadily lower it onto the required 400-km science orbit (we'll post more news on aerobraking preparations shortly).

The spacecraft, by the way, is in excellent health.

To date, TGO has only experienced one ‘safe mode’ – when a glitch causes the spacecraft to reboot itself and wait for corrective commands. That happened during preliminary in-flight testing of the main engine, where a faulty configuration was quickly identified and fixed. The craft later performed highly accurate burns of the engine for several deep-space manoeuvres and the Mars orbit insertion.

from Rocket Science http://ift.tt/2fLMrjq
v

Solar in Your Community Challenge: Apply Today!

About the Author: Caroline McGregor is the acting Soft Costs Program Manager at the U.S. Department of Energy’s SunShot Initiative.

One million solar energy systems across the country are powering homes, businesses and communities with renewable, affordable and clean energy. And yet, nearly 50 percent of homes lack the appropriate roof structure to go solar. Beyond that, many homeowners simply can’t afford the upfront cost to install their own system and have difficulty accessing affordable financing options. These limitations are especially burdensome for many low income families who could benefit from lower energy costs, but don’t have the extra money to invest in home renovations.

To spur solar adoption by these communities, the Department of Energy’s SunShot Initiative launched the $5 million Solar in Your Community Challenge, which expands solar access to Americans who have been left out of the growing solar market.

In order to make solar energy more accessible for every American, the Solar in Your Community Challenge encourages the development of innovative financial and business models that serve low and moderate-income communities. Offering $5 million in cash prizes and technical assistance over 18 months, the challenge supports teams across the country to develop projects or programs that reach underserved customers in their communities, while proving that these business models can be widely replicated and scaled up.

To ensure that communities with environmental justice concerns benefit from this challenge, we have designed the challenge rules with these communities in mind. Teams that successfully demonstrate new ways of opening up solar for low- and moderate-income communities will be eligible to compete for the grand prize of $500,000.

Do you want your community to participate in this challenge?

We are hosting an informational webinar to provide further instructions on how to participate! Make sure you reserve your spot by registering today.

Date/Time: Thursday, December 1, 2016; 2 to 3 p.m. ET

Register at: http://ift.tt/2gIF6TX 

If you have questions regarding the webinar, please contact Michele Boyd.

The early application deadline to participate in the challenge is January 6, 2017, and the regular deadline is March 17, 2017. Visit the Solar in Your Community Challenge website to learn more about the challenge and to apply today!

Given the current growth of the energy market, solar installations will continue to grow at an unprecedented rate. And we want you to be part of that bright future!

We look forward to speaking with all of you during the upcoming and we are excited to review your applications.

from The EPA Blog http://ift.tt/2gkzDod

About the Author: Caroline McGregor is the acting Soft Costs Program Manager at the U.S. Department of Energy’s SunShot Initiative.

One million solar energy systems across the country are powering homes, businesses and communities with renewable, affordable and clean energy. And yet, nearly 50 percent of homes lack the appropriate roof structure to go solar. Beyond that, many homeowners simply can’t afford the upfront cost to install their own system and have difficulty accessing affordable financing options. These limitations are especially burdensome for many low income families who could benefit from lower energy costs, but don’t have the extra money to invest in home renovations.

To spur solar adoption by these communities, the Department of Energy’s SunShot Initiative launched the $5 million Solar in Your Community Challenge, which expands solar access to Americans who have been left out of the growing solar market.

In order to make solar energy more accessible for every American, the Solar in Your Community Challenge encourages the development of innovative financial and business models that serve low and moderate-income communities. Offering $5 million in cash prizes and technical assistance over 18 months, the challenge supports teams across the country to develop projects or programs that reach underserved customers in their communities, while proving that these business models can be widely replicated and scaled up.

To ensure that communities with environmental justice concerns benefit from this challenge, we have designed the challenge rules with these communities in mind. Teams that successfully demonstrate new ways of opening up solar for low- and moderate-income communities will be eligible to compete for the grand prize of $500,000.

Do you want your community to participate in this challenge?

We are hosting an informational webinar to provide further instructions on how to participate! Make sure you reserve your spot by registering today.

Date/Time: Thursday, December 1, 2016; 2 to 3 p.m. ET

Register at: http://ift.tt/2gIF6TX 

If you have questions regarding the webinar, please contact Michele Boyd.

The early application deadline to participate in the challenge is January 6, 2017, and the regular deadline is March 17, 2017. Visit the Solar in Your Community Challenge website to learn more about the challenge and to apply today!

Given the current growth of the energy market, solar installations will continue to grow at an unprecedented rate. And we want you to be part of that bright future!

We look forward to speaking with all of you during the upcoming and we are excited to review your applications.

from The EPA Blog http://ift.tt/2gkzDod

Could dark matter be powering the EMdrive? (Synopsis) [Starts With A Bang]

“…axions are potentially detectable through their weak coupling to electromagnetism…” -Aaron Chou

We know, from hundreds of years of experience with the laws of physics, that momentum is strictly conserved, and therefore a reactionless drive is impossible. What’s not impossible is an engine that has a reaction that’s simply invisible, or otherwise undetectable to us. This has been seen in experiments involving neutrinos, but NASA’s impossible space engine, the EMdrive, offers another possibility: a dark matter reaction.

Image credit: ESO/L. Calçada, of the illustration of the dark matter halo surrounding the luminous disk of our galaxy.

You see, one of the leading candidates for dark matter is the axion, an ultra-light, massive, abundant particle that would couple to microwave photons under the right conditions. While ADMX, the axion dark matter experiment, looks for this coupling in a microwave cavity, it’s come up empty so far. Could the tinkerer who invented the EMdrive have accidentally stumbled upon dark matter instead?

The surface magnetic field of an active EMdrive, during the NASA test. Image credit: NASA Spaceflight forums, via Chris Bergin.

It’s a highly speculative possibility, and it’s far more likely that the EMdrive simply doesn’t work. But this is why we do the experiments in the first place, with more to follow!

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2fLyhiD

“…axions are potentially detectable through their weak coupling to electromagnetism…” -Aaron Chou

We know, from hundreds of years of experience with the laws of physics, that momentum is strictly conserved, and therefore a reactionless drive is impossible. What’s not impossible is an engine that has a reaction that’s simply invisible, or otherwise undetectable to us. This has been seen in experiments involving neutrinos, but NASA’s impossible space engine, the EMdrive, offers another possibility: a dark matter reaction.

Image credit: ESO/L. Calçada, of the illustration of the dark matter halo surrounding the luminous disk of our galaxy.

You see, one of the leading candidates for dark matter is the axion, an ultra-light, massive, abundant particle that would couple to microwave photons under the right conditions. While ADMX, the axion dark matter experiment, looks for this coupling in a microwave cavity, it’s come up empty so far. Could the tinkerer who invented the EMdrive have accidentally stumbled upon dark matter instead?

The surface magnetic field of an active EMdrive, during the NASA test. Image credit: NASA Spaceflight forums, via Chris Bergin.

It’s a highly speculative possibility, and it’s far more likely that the EMdrive simply doesn’t work. But this is why we do the experiments in the first place, with more to follow!

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2fLyhiD

What would Earth be like with no moon?

Most moons in our solar system are tiny relative to the planets they orbit. These planets wouldn’t miss a moon or two if one got knocked out of orbit. But Earth’s moon is relatively large. So Earth without its large nearby moon would be a very different world indeed.

Imagine … no solar or lunar eclipses.

No calendars based on a system of months. The word month, after all, stems from a word that means moon. That’s because many calendars are based on the changing phases of the moon.

With no moon, there’d be no nearby world for astronauts to visit. We might never have begun to venture out into the solar system.

The moon and sun together cause the tides. If we’d never had a moon, we’d still have tides, but they wouldn’t be as strong.

What’s more, the moon has a place in human culture. Imagine no romantic moonlight walks – no concept of moon madness, or lunacy.

But the biggest change – for us humans and for other earthly life – would be in the length of Earth’s day. Without a moon, Earth would spin faster. Our day would be shorter. Why?

It’s because, billions of years ago when Earth was young, our planet spun around on its axis much faster. Our world’s cycle of day and night was less than 10 hours long. The ebb and flow of the tides are what put the brakes on Earth’s spin. So – if you’re imagining Earth with no moon – you have to imagine our day on Earth much shorter than our present-day 24 hours.

Selected moons of the solar system, with the Earth for scale. Notice that the moon is pretty big relative to Earth. But Pluto and its moon are even closer in size. Image via NASA.

Bottom line: Some differences on Earth today, if Earth didn’t have a moon.

from EarthSky http://ift.tt/2gx5zDr

Most moons in our solar system are tiny relative to the planets they orbit. These planets wouldn’t miss a moon or two if one got knocked out of orbit. But Earth’s moon is relatively large. So Earth without its large nearby moon would be a very different world indeed.

Imagine … no solar or lunar eclipses.

No calendars based on a system of months. The word month, after all, stems from a word that means moon. That’s because many calendars are based on the changing phases of the moon.

With no moon, there’d be no nearby world for astronauts to visit. We might never have begun to venture out into the solar system.

The moon and sun together cause the tides. If we’d never had a moon, we’d still have tides, but they wouldn’t be as strong.

What’s more, the moon has a place in human culture. Imagine no romantic moonlight walks – no concept of moon madness, or lunacy.

But the biggest change – for us humans and for other earthly life – would be in the length of Earth’s day. Without a moon, Earth would spin faster. Our day would be shorter. Why?

It’s because, billions of years ago when Earth was young, our planet spun around on its axis much faster. Our world’s cycle of day and night was less than 10 hours long. The ebb and flow of the tides are what put the brakes on Earth’s spin. So – if you’re imagining Earth with no moon – you have to imagine our day on Earth much shorter than our present-day 24 hours.

Selected moons of the solar system, with the Earth for scale. Notice that the moon is pretty big relative to Earth. But Pluto and its moon are even closer in size. Image via NASA.

Bottom line: Some differences on Earth today, if Earth didn’t have a moon.

from EarthSky http://ift.tt/2gx5zDr

2016-17 winter outlook for US

NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center issued this U.S. 2016-17 winter weather outlook for the United States in late October.

NOAA forecasters said La Niña is expected to influence winter conditions this year, predicting the climate phenomenon is likely to develop in late fall or early winter. According to a NOAA statement:

La Niña favors drier, warmer winters in the southern U.S and wetter, cooler conditions in the northern U.S. If La Niña conditions do materialize, forecasters say it should be weak and potentially short-lived.

What is La Niña?

Will your winter look like this? Photo via Rebecca Walker

Enjoying EarthSky? Sign up for our free daily newsletter today!

Bottom line: Winter weather outlook for 2016-2017 from NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center.

Read more from NOAA

from EarthSky http://ift.tt/2fQtob3

NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center issued this U.S. 2016-17 winter weather outlook for the United States in late October.

NOAA forecasters said La Niña is expected to influence winter conditions this year, predicting the climate phenomenon is likely to develop in late fall or early winter. According to a NOAA statement:

La Niña favors drier, warmer winters in the southern U.S and wetter, cooler conditions in the northern U.S. If La Niña conditions do materialize, forecasters say it should be weak and potentially short-lived.

What is La Niña?

Will your winter look like this? Photo via Rebecca Walker

Enjoying EarthSky? Sign up for our free daily newsletter today!

Bottom line: Winter weather outlook for 2016-2017 from NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center.

Read more from NOAA

from EarthSky http://ift.tt/2fQtob3

Milky Way over Eagle Lake, Maine

Photo by Manish Mamtani.

Manish Mamtani captured this image over Eagle Lake in Acadia National Park, Maine.

from EarthSky http://ift.tt/2fQuzaM

Photo by Manish Mamtani.

Manish Mamtani captured this image over Eagle Lake in Acadia National Park, Maine.

from EarthSky http://ift.tt/2fQuzaM

Aced: TGO data relay capability

On 22 November 2016, the NASA radio system on ESA's Trace Gas Orbiter (TGO), which arrived at Mars in October, succeeded in its first test of receiving data transmitted from NASA Mars rovers, both Opportunity and Curiosity. Below we've posted an extract from the JPL web news article with some additional tech details from the TGO mission team at ESOC.

Strengthening the Mars Telecommunications Network credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/ESA

Here's an extract from the NASA/JPL news article:

NASA Radio on Europe's New Mars Orbiter Aces Relay Test

The transmissions from NASA rovers Opportunity and Curiosity, received by one of the twin Electra radios on the orbiter on Nov. 22, mark a strengthening of the international telecommunications network supporting Mars exploration. The orbiter's main radio for communications with Earth subsequently relayed onward to Earth the data received by Electra.

ESA's ExoMars Trace Gas Orbiter (TGO) carries two Electra radios provided by NASA. This image shows a step in installation and testing of the first of the two radios, inside a clean room at Thales Alenia Space, in Cannes, France, in June 2014. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/ESA/TAS

The European Space Agency's (ESA's) ExoMars/Trace Gas Orbiter reached Mars on Oct. 19, 2016. As planned, its initial orbit shape is highly elliptical, ranging from as far as 60,000 miles (98,000 kilometres) above the surface to less than 200 miles (less than 310 kilometres). Each loop takes 4.2 days to complete.

Frequent use of TGO's relay capability to support Mars rover operations is planned to begin more than a year from now. That's after the orbiter finishes adjusting its orbit to a near-circular path about 250 miles (400 kilometres) above Mars' surface.

"The arrival of ESA's Trace Gas Orbiter at Mars, with its NASA-provided Electra relay payload on board, represents a significant step forward in our Mars relay capabilities," said Chad Edwards, manager of the Mars Relay Network Office within the Mars Exploration Program at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California. "In concert with our three existing NASA orbiters and ESA's earlier Mars Express orbiter, we now have a truly international Mars relay network that will greatly increase the amount of data that future Mars landers and rovers can return from the surface of the Red Planet."

The JPL-designed Electra radios include special features for relaying data from a rover or stationary lander to an orbiter passing overhead. Relay of information from Mars-surface craft to Mars orbiters, then from the Mars orbiters to Earth, enables receiving much more data from the surface missions than would be possible with a direct-to-Earth radio link from the rovers or landers.

TGO Flight Director Michel Denis Credit: ESA/J. Mai

"We already have almost 13 years' experience using ESA's Mars Express as an on-call backup for data relay from active Mars rovers, and TGO will greatly expand this to routine science-data relay," said Michel Denis, TGO flight director at ESA's European Space Operations Centre, Darmstadt, Germany. "In 2020, TGO will extend this relay support to ESA's ExoMars rover and the Russian Surface Platform, an important capability together with its science mission that enhances the international data network at Mars."

As an example of Electra capabilities, during a relay session between an Electra on the surface and one on an orbiter, the radios can maximize data volume by actively adjusting the data rate to be slower when the orbiter is near the horizon from the surface robot's perspective, faster when it is overhead.

Access full text here

Here are some tech details on the successful test, contributed by the TGO mission team at ESOC.

Scenes at ESA/ESOC, Darmstadt, Germany, on 19 October 2016 during the arrival of ExoMars. Credit: ESA/J. Mai

TGO's Electra radio system was already put through some initial testing while the spacecraft was enroute to Mars, and was successfully used in the so-called 'Open Loop' recording mode to record signals from Schiaparelli during the test module's separation from TGO and during Schiaparelli's Entry, Descent and Landing on Mars on 19 October.

The purpose of the two tests performed on 22 November was to receive, for the first time, data transmitted from the NASA rovers on the surface of Mars.

• A 'Raw data mode relay session' with the Curiosity vehicle in a 20-minute window between 15:17 - 15:37 UTC at Mars allowed TGO and its Electra system to fetch and relay to Earth 9.9 Mbits of rover data.
• Shortly later, during a 10-minute slot between 16:40-16:50 UTC, a 'Return link session' with MER-B Opportunity succeeded in relaying more than 3.3 Mbits of rover data.

Both tests enabled maintaining a continuous and uninterrupted rover-to-orbiter radio data link that can be used for future relay activities. The two overflights happened outside of real-time visibility from ground stations, and used TGO's prime Electra unit (there is also a back-up unit on board).

from Rocket Science http://ift.tt/2gUDF7V
v

On 22 November 2016, the NASA radio system on ESA's Trace Gas Orbiter (TGO), which arrived at Mars in October, succeeded in its first test of receiving data transmitted from NASA Mars rovers, both Opportunity and Curiosity. Below we've posted an extract from the JPL web news article with some additional tech details from the TGO mission team at ESOC.

Strengthening the Mars Telecommunications Network credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/ESA

Here's an extract from the NASA/JPL news article:

NASA Radio on Europe's New Mars Orbiter Aces Relay Test

The transmissions from NASA rovers Opportunity and Curiosity, received by one of the twin Electra radios on the orbiter on Nov. 22, mark a strengthening of the international telecommunications network supporting Mars exploration. The orbiter's main radio for communications with Earth subsequently relayed onward to Earth the data received by Electra.

ESA's ExoMars Trace Gas Orbiter (TGO) carries two Electra radios provided by NASA. This image shows a step in installation and testing of the first of the two radios, inside a clean room at Thales Alenia Space, in Cannes, France, in June 2014. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/ESA/TAS

The European Space Agency's (ESA's) ExoMars/Trace Gas Orbiter reached Mars on Oct. 19, 2016. As planned, its initial orbit shape is highly elliptical, ranging from as far as 60,000 miles (98,000 kilometres) above the surface to less than 200 miles (less than 310 kilometres). Each loop takes 4.2 days to complete.

Frequent use of TGO's relay capability to support Mars rover operations is planned to begin more than a year from now. That's after the orbiter finishes adjusting its orbit to a near-circular path about 250 miles (400 kilometres) above Mars' surface.

"The arrival of ESA's Trace Gas Orbiter at Mars, with its NASA-provided Electra relay payload on board, represents a significant step forward in our Mars relay capabilities," said Chad Edwards, manager of the Mars Relay Network Office within the Mars Exploration Program at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California. "In concert with our three existing NASA orbiters and ESA's earlier Mars Express orbiter, we now have a truly international Mars relay network that will greatly increase the amount of data that future Mars landers and rovers can return from the surface of the Red Planet."

The JPL-designed Electra radios include special features for relaying data from a rover or stationary lander to an orbiter passing overhead. Relay of information from Mars-surface craft to Mars orbiters, then from the Mars orbiters to Earth, enables receiving much more data from the surface missions than would be possible with a direct-to-Earth radio link from the rovers or landers.

TGO Flight Director Michel Denis Credit: ESA/J. Mai

"We already have almost 13 years' experience using ESA's Mars Express as an on-call backup for data relay from active Mars rovers, and TGO will greatly expand this to routine science-data relay," said Michel Denis, TGO flight director at ESA's European Space Operations Centre, Darmstadt, Germany. "In 2020, TGO will extend this relay support to ESA's ExoMars rover and the Russian Surface Platform, an important capability together with its science mission that enhances the international data network at Mars."

As an example of Electra capabilities, during a relay session between an Electra on the surface and one on an orbiter, the radios can maximize data volume by actively adjusting the data rate to be slower when the orbiter is near the horizon from the surface robot's perspective, faster when it is overhead.

Access full text here

Here are some tech details on the successful test, contributed by the TGO mission team at ESOC.

Scenes at ESA/ESOC, Darmstadt, Germany, on 19 October 2016 during the arrival of ExoMars. Credit: ESA/J. Mai

TGO's Electra radio system was already put through some initial testing while the spacecraft was enroute to Mars, and was successfully used in the so-called 'Open Loop' recording mode to record signals from Schiaparelli during the test module's separation from TGO and during Schiaparelli's Entry, Descent and Landing on Mars on 19 October.

The purpose of the two tests performed on 22 November was to receive, for the first time, data transmitted from the NASA rovers on the surface of Mars.

• A 'Raw data mode relay session' with the Curiosity vehicle in a 20-minute window between 15:17 - 15:37 UTC at Mars allowed TGO and its Electra system to fetch and relay to Earth 9.9 Mbits of rover data.
• Shortly later, during a 10-minute slot between 16:40-16:50 UTC, a 'Return link session' with MER-B Opportunity succeeded in relaying more than 3.3 Mbits of rover data.

Both tests enabled maintaining a continuous and uninterrupted rover-to-orbiter radio data link that can be used for future relay activities. The two overflights happened outside of real-time visibility from ground stations, and used TGO's prime Electra unit (there is also a back-up unit on board).

from Rocket Science http://ift.tt/2gUDF7V
v

Rumba decides to spontaneously reboot

Today's post contributed by Cluster spacecraft operations manager Bruno Sousa.

Another day in the life of an operations team

On 23 November, at around 19:00 CET, the Spacecraft Controller (Spacon) on shift for the four satellites of the Cluster II mission, had just initiated a ground contact from ESA’s ground station at Villafranca, Spain. He noted the weak signal that was arriving at the spacecraft, but – given that the spacecraft was able to lock onto it anyway – he proceeded to initiate the contact and prepare the download of the scientific data stored onboard. As the first commands were uplinked (including a change in the telemetry bit rate), quite suddenly, the spacecraft went mute. No more telemetry was received.

Cluster team in the DCR. Credit: ESA

After troubleshooting for potential problems with the ground segment, including a possible misconfiguration of the station as a result of the change in telemetry mode, the Spacon contacted the on-call operations engineer, who quickly came into the control room. Together they initiated the contingency procedure that covers “loss of telemetry”. The procedure included switching on the on-board radio transponder, and this immediately restored the flow of telemetry.

After a preliminary analysis of the data the spacecraft was generating, we determined that its status was consistent with a ‘reboot’ (the status of a software ‘flag’ that disables further reboots was enabled, indicating that one had just taken place). The spacecraft stores in a protected area of memory a list of events that are generated by the software around the reboot. Once we downloaded these, we could immediately tell that the software had entered an exception clause while decoding a command.

The last time we had seen something like this was back in 2010 when a very similar occurrence took place. Luckily, we record very thoroughly all such occurrences including all the investigation efforts done to get to the source of the problem.

It had been determined in those earlier investigations that, upon reception of a command (and only of a  very specific type), the software validates it, and if it finds that the command is reported as having ‘size 0’ (indicating that the command has become corrupted), it then immediately triggers a reboot of the on-board processor – and this happens even before that function has a chance to do a validation of the command’s checksum, which would have identified the corruption and cause it to simply be rejected.

The corruption of the command was most likely due to the poor signal strength received onboard. The reason the signal was so weak was not possible to determine. We did note that, once we changed the station from Villafranca to Maspalomas station, the signal improved quite significantly, but we couldn’t determine any problem with the first station.  

Maspalomas station. Credit: ESA/F. Macia

Following the reboot, the spacecraft remained in the so-called ‘Nominal Survival Mode’, which includes leaving the transponder off, and hence, we saw no more telemetry from the spacecraft. Another consequence of the reboot is that the onboard solid state memory, where the science data is recorded, is also switched off. Because the technology for this hardware dates from the mid-90’s, a switch off means that all data stored there at that time is lost; in this case that represented more than 40 hours of recorded data, which unfortunately cannot be recovered.

The Cluster flight control team communicates avidly via mobile text messaging, and soon the on-call engineer was being assisted by two other colleagues who came in to provide assistance. When running long and complicated procedures, it’s always handy to have another pair of eyes looking over your shoulder so that you don’t forget anything.

Together, they swiftly proceeded to recover the nominal configuration for the spacecraft, including reactivating most of the payloads. As the visibility from the ground station was coming to an end, the team had to select the payloads that could still be re-activated within the available time, with the remaining activations carried on the following station pass. At around 01:00 AM, the team concluded its intervention and the engineers went home to a well-deserved rest.

And that was another day in the life of an operations team!

from Rocket Science http://ift.tt/2gHU9NV
v

Today's post contributed by Cluster spacecraft operations manager Bruno Sousa.

Another day in the life of an operations team

On 23 November, at around 19:00 CET, the Spacecraft Controller (Spacon) on shift for the four satellites of the Cluster II mission, had just initiated a ground contact from ESA’s ground station at Villafranca, Spain. He noted the weak signal that was arriving at the spacecraft, but – given that the spacecraft was able to lock onto it anyway – he proceeded to initiate the contact and prepare the download of the scientific data stored onboard. As the first commands were uplinked (including a change in the telemetry bit rate), quite suddenly, the spacecraft went mute. No more telemetry was received.

Cluster team in the DCR. Credit: ESA

After troubleshooting for potential problems with the ground segment, including a possible misconfiguration of the station as a result of the change in telemetry mode, the Spacon contacted the on-call operations engineer, who quickly came into the control room. Together they initiated the contingency procedure that covers “loss of telemetry”. The procedure included switching on the on-board radio transponder, and this immediately restored the flow of telemetry.

After a preliminary analysis of the data the spacecraft was generating, we determined that its status was consistent with a ‘reboot’ (the status of a software ‘flag’ that disables further reboots was enabled, indicating that one had just taken place). The spacecraft stores in a protected area of memory a list of events that are generated by the software around the reboot. Once we downloaded these, we could immediately tell that the software had entered an exception clause while decoding a command.

The last time we had seen something like this was back in 2010 when a very similar occurrence took place. Luckily, we record very thoroughly all such occurrences including all the investigation efforts done to get to the source of the problem.

It had been determined in those earlier investigations that, upon reception of a command (and only of a  very specific type), the software validates it, and if it finds that the command is reported as having ‘size 0’ (indicating that the command has become corrupted), it then immediately triggers a reboot of the on-board processor – and this happens even before that function has a chance to do a validation of the command’s checksum, which would have identified the corruption and cause it to simply be rejected.

The corruption of the command was most likely due to the poor signal strength received onboard. The reason the signal was so weak was not possible to determine. We did note that, once we changed the station from Villafranca to Maspalomas station, the signal improved quite significantly, but we couldn’t determine any problem with the first station.  

Maspalomas station. Credit: ESA/F. Macia

Following the reboot, the spacecraft remained in the so-called ‘Nominal Survival Mode’, which includes leaving the transponder off, and hence, we saw no more telemetry from the spacecraft. Another consequence of the reboot is that the onboard solid state memory, where the science data is recorded, is also switched off. Because the technology for this hardware dates from the mid-90’s, a switch off means that all data stored there at that time is lost; in this case that represented more than 40 hours of recorded data, which unfortunately cannot be recovered.

The Cluster flight control team communicates avidly via mobile text messaging, and soon the on-call engineer was being assisted by two other colleagues who came in to provide assistance. When running long and complicated procedures, it’s always handy to have another pair of eyes looking over your shoulder so that you don’t forget anything.

Together, they swiftly proceeded to recover the nominal configuration for the spacecraft, including reactivating most of the payloads. As the visibility from the ground station was coming to an end, the team had to select the payloads that could still be re-activated within the available time, with the remaining activations carried on the following station pass. At around 01:00 AM, the team concluded its intervention and the engineers went home to a well-deserved rest.

And that was another day in the life of an operations team!

from Rocket Science http://ift.tt/2gHU9NV
v

Moon and Mercury on November 30

Tonight – November 30, 2016 – if your western horizon is clear and unobstructed, you’ll find the moon and Mercury below dazzling Venus in the sunset direction, for a brief time after the sun goes down.

Everyone in the world has a chance to see it, but we’ll all see it oriented slightly differently with respect to the horizon … and we’ll all see the moon closer to or farther from Mercury than others in other parts of the world. The chart at the top of this post, for example, shows the view from mid-northern latitudes in the Americas. At mid-northern latitudes in Europe, the planets are similarly positioned, although the moon sits closer to the horizon.

That means, after sunset November 30, we expect the tiny sliver of the very young waxing crescent moon to be easier to see from North America (and Hawaii) than at corresponding latitudes in Europe.

But don’t worry about these tiny differences! Just know that – no matter where you are – you’ll want to look for the moon and Mercury on November 30 shortly after the sun goes down, very near the spot the sun set.

At nightfall, look for the red planet Mars above Venus. It’ll be easier to catch than Mercury!

From northerly latitudes, the planet Mercury is not that easy to catch. You’ll want to bring along your binoculars, in case you want them to scan for the moon and Mercury in the glow of evening twilight.

On the other hand, Venus – the sky’s brightest planet – is in the west after sunset now, too. It’s very bright and easy to spot, and should pop out some 20 minutes (or sooner) after sunset. Once you spot Venus, try hopping from Venus to Mercury – drawing an imaginary line between Venus and the spot on the horizon where the sun went down.

Click here for almanac recommendations; an almanac can help you find setting times for the moon and Mercury in your sky.

In North America, on November 30, the moon sets after Mercury; south of the equator – in South America – Mercury sets after the moon. From mid-northern North American latitudes, you might see the moon – but not Mercury; in southern South America, you might see Mercury – but not the moon. At and near the equator, the moon and Mercury set at nearly the same time, so this could be the good spot to see the both the moon and Mercury after sunset on November 30.

Western evening dusk on November 30, 2016, from the vantage point of Santiago, Chile

Far and away – of all the places in the world – the Southern Hemisphere has the advantage for seeing Mercury in the evening sky. At temperate latitudes in the Southern Hemisphere, Mercury sets approximately one and one-half hours after the sun. At mid-northern latitudes, on the other hand, Mercury sets about one hour after sunset. From the Southern Hemisphere, especially from New Zealand and Australia, look for the close pairing of the waxing crescent moon and Mercury in your western sky after sunset December 1.

Mercury is climbing away from the glare of sunset day by day, to reach its greatest angular distance from the setting sun on December 11, 2016. If you miss the moon and (or) Mercury after sunset November 30, try again on December 1.

Keep watching! The waxing crescent crescent will be higher up after sunset and staying out later after dark in early December 2016.

Bottom line: We’ll be eager to find out how many EarthSky readers will catch the moon and Mercury at evening dusk on November 30, 2016! Let us know – and post your photos – in the comments below.

from EarthSky http://ift.tt/2eQXP0N

Tonight – November 30, 2016 – if your western horizon is clear and unobstructed, you’ll find the moon and Mercury below dazzling Venus in the sunset direction, for a brief time after the sun goes down.

Everyone in the world has a chance to see it, but we’ll all see it oriented slightly differently with respect to the horizon … and we’ll all see the moon closer to or farther from Mercury than others in other parts of the world. The chart at the top of this post, for example, shows the view from mid-northern latitudes in the Americas. At mid-northern latitudes in Europe, the planets are similarly positioned, although the moon sits closer to the horizon.

That means, after sunset November 30, we expect the tiny sliver of the very young waxing crescent moon to be easier to see from North America (and Hawaii) than at corresponding latitudes in Europe.

But don’t worry about these tiny differences! Just know that – no matter where you are – you’ll want to look for the moon and Mercury on November 30 shortly after the sun goes down, very near the spot the sun set.

At nightfall, look for the red planet Mars above Venus. It’ll be easier to catch than Mercury!

From northerly latitudes, the planet Mercury is not that easy to catch. You’ll want to bring along your binoculars, in case you want them to scan for the moon and Mercury in the glow of evening twilight.

On the other hand, Venus – the sky’s brightest planet – is in the west after sunset now, too. It’s very bright and easy to spot, and should pop out some 20 minutes (or sooner) after sunset. Once you spot Venus, try hopping from Venus to Mercury – drawing an imaginary line between Venus and the spot on the horizon where the sun went down.

Click here for almanac recommendations; an almanac can help you find setting times for the moon and Mercury in your sky.

In North America, on November 30, the moon sets after Mercury; south of the equator – in South America – Mercury sets after the moon. From mid-northern North American latitudes, you might see the moon – but not Mercury; in southern South America, you might see Mercury – but not the moon. At and near the equator, the moon and Mercury set at nearly the same time, so this could be the good spot to see the both the moon and Mercury after sunset on November 30.

Western evening dusk on November 30, 2016, from the vantage point of Santiago, Chile

Far and away – of all the places in the world – the Southern Hemisphere has the advantage for seeing Mercury in the evening sky. At temperate latitudes in the Southern Hemisphere, Mercury sets approximately one and one-half hours after the sun. At mid-northern latitudes, on the other hand, Mercury sets about one hour after sunset. From the Southern Hemisphere, especially from New Zealand and Australia, look for the close pairing of the waxing crescent moon and Mercury in your western sky after sunset December 1.

Mercury is climbing away from the glare of sunset day by day, to reach its greatest angular distance from the setting sun on December 11, 2016. If you miss the moon and (or) Mercury after sunset November 30, try again on December 1.

Keep watching! The waxing crescent crescent will be higher up after sunset and staying out later after dark in early December 2016.

Bottom line: We’ll be eager to find out how many EarthSky readers will catch the moon and Mercury at evening dusk on November 30, 2016! Let us know – and post your photos – in the comments below.

from EarthSky http://ift.tt/2eQXP0N