Connect with us

News

Opinion: Why I’m a space environmentalist — and why you should be, too

Published

on

Opinion: Why I’m a space environmentalist — and why you should be, too
Because of house exploration, and our historical past of placing objects into house, we all know extra about ourselves, our planet and our universe. Our lives as we speak rely on what’s in house: communications programs, climate forecasting, monetary transactions and even the situation and navigation features in your cellular phone depend on satellites. Most of the improvements now we have come to like, like reminiscence foam mattresses and LASIK eye surgical procedure, happened due to our celestial exploration.
Till now, house has been seen as a free-for-all — the subsequent frontier to discover. However what we overlook is that it is also an ecosystem — and like all ecosystem, exploration of it has come at an environmental value. Even the tiniest speck of particles, orbiting at round 15,700 miles per hour, can harm satellites and disrupt the companies which have turn out to be important to our every day lives. Even worse, giant items of particles can fall from the sky and crash on Earth. In July, remnants of a Chinese language rocket returned from orbit and landed within the Indian Ocean. Whereas we’re lucky that it did not trigger additional harm, we will not be so fortunate subsequent time. There’s an considerable probability that somebody shall be killed by house particles this decade.

I’ve at all times felt a way of stewardship towards this place we all know as our dwelling, Earth. That feeling got here to fruition most intensely whereas on a visit to Alaska in 2015, once I noticed the way in which sure indigenous teams stay in concord with our planet regardless of the horrible environmental and societal harm brought on by colonization. I assumed: ‘We, as humanity, won’t survive if we don’t embrace stewardship over possession.’

Possession asks us to make claims to rights, whereas stewardship asks us to make claims to obligations. The impact on the atmosphere, and our capability to make use of it harmoniously and sustainably, is decided by whether or not we undertake an ethos of possession or of stewardship.

As an astrodynamicist, who research the movement of pure and human-made our bodies in house, I knew house was a uncared for ecosystem that wanted to be protected. If this subsequent frontier is filled with junk, we cannot be capable of totally discover or faucet into the improvements that house can present. That may jeopardize our capability to reliably know extra about ourselves and our planet — information that stems uniquely from space-based knowledge.

There may be a lot redundancy in house. Over 4,500 lively satellites at present orbit Earth. This quantity has doubled prior to now two years and can proceed to develop, however a lot of them are pointless. We frequently see many various satellites in a standard orbital freeway that present the identical companies. This redundancy stems from an possession versus a stewardship perspective. As we have seen on Earth, a scarcity of shared sources throughout borders and sectors has allowed this free-for-all to perpetuate, resulting in larger air pollution in house and the growing chance of particles falling from the sky. To make sure, competitors in and of itself will not be a foul factor. Nonetheless, when competitors exists with out holistic administration of sources and ecosystems, the end result is detrimental for all — a tragedy of the commons.

Armed with this data, and impressed by indigenous traditions of environmental stewardship, I turned — what I prefer to name — an area environmentalist.

Creating empathy for house

So how will we clear up this rising concern of house particles and never repeat the identical errors we have made on Earth? How are you going to turn out to be an area environmentalist too?

Advertisement
The excellent news is that there are already large-scale options in play. Authorities businesses are starting to become involved. In July, the White Home launched its orbital particles implementation plan, outlining 44 particular actions for presidency businesses to steer. The European Area Company is launching its first particles elimination challenge in 2025.
Experts say millions of pieces of debris circle Earth. At orbital speeds, an object the size of a paperclip could damage a satellite.
Within the personal sector, the Area Sustainability Score (SSR), which went stay this summer season, gives a data-based ranking system to quantify the sustainability of house missions, whereas providing sensible steerage to enhance sustainability efficiency.

For a mean citizen, being a part of the answer can really feel overwhelming — however all of us have a task to play. It begins with paying attention to what’s occurring, spreading consciousness and studying extra about how interconnected every little thing really is. Everybody wants to grasp that what we do in a single location on Earth influences our oceans, our air and sure, house. And we have to act accordingly.

I co-founded and function chief scientist at Privateer, an organization which helps these efforts by creating proprietary instruments to observe human-made objects in house. We goal to point out folks the proof of this interconnectedness in order that they’re extra reluctant to say, “that is not my drawback,” and we wish to assure a secure and accessible future for humanity’s house sources.

Finally, house sustainability is extra than simply monitoring satellites and particles precisely. It is important that these knowledge are used to assist the accountable and harmonious use of house. We should discover methods to share house between personal firms, authorities businesses and academia throughout nations, generations and cultures.

Area is a world commons. It belongs to nobody.

On the finish of the day, all of us must turn out to be house environmentalists.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

News

Donald Trump says he ‘may or may not’ strike Iran

Published

on

Donald Trump says he ‘may or may not’ strike Iran

Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free

Donald Trump has made his most explicit comments yet about possible US military action against Iran, saying that the next week would be “very big” in determining the course of the war between Israel and the Islamic republic.

Speaking after Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned Washington of “irreparable damage” if it intervened, Trump suggested Tehran wanted to negotiate but had left it perilously late.

“I may do it. I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I’m going to do,” Trump said at the White House on Wednesday morning, a day after receiving a Situation Room briefing on the conflict.

Advertisement

“The next week is going to be very big — maybe less than a week,” he added in remarks that hinted at a possible timeframe for the US decision.

Hours later, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a statement that he had a “very warm” conversation with Trump on Tuesday night.

Netanyahu said Israel was “advancing step by step” to remove Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile threats, adding: “We are attacking nuclear installations, missiles, command centres and the symbols of the regime.”

But he also acknowledged that Israel was “sustaining many losses, painful losses” from Iran’s missile strikes. 

The Pentagon on Monday ordered the USS Nimitz aircraft carrier and three missile-guided destroyers to redeploy from the South China Sea to the Middle East, a journey that is likely to take about a week.

Advertisement

The US president said he had not given Netanyahu any indication of greater US involvement in the strikes against Iran.

But he said he had told Netanyahu to “keep going” with his attacks.

Trump added that Tehran, which was engaged in indirect talks with Washington over its nuclear programme before Israel launched its war, had suggested sending a delegation to the White House for talks. He described the move as “courageous”, even though he said Iran was “totally defenceless” and in an “unsustainable” position.

“Iran’s got a lot of trouble and they want to negotiate,” he said, adding that he had told the Iranians “it’s very late to be talking”, while cautioning “nothing’s too late.”

Oil prices fell after Trump’s remarks, which investors saw as potentially dovish, with the Brent crude benchmark down 2 per cent from Tuesday’s close, before it pared back some of its losses.

Advertisement

However, Iran’s mission to the UN denied Trump’s account, posting on X: “No Iranian official has ever asked to grovel at the gates of the White House . . . Iran does NOT negotiate under duress.”

In a televised message to the Iranian people earlier in the day, Khamenei hit out at Trump’s call for Tehran’s “unconditional surrender”, which the US president suggests would mean the complete destruction of the country’s nuclear programme.

Israel says the programme is aimed at developing a weapon, although Iran says it is purely peaceful.

“Those with wisdom who know Iran, its people and history, will never use the language of threat to address this nation because they will never surrender,” the Iranian supreme leader said.

“The Americans should know that any US military engagement will undoubtedly result in irreparable damage,” he added.

Advertisement

When asked about Khamenei’s comments, Trump said: “I say, ‘good luck’.”

Testifying before Congress on Wednesday, US defence secretary Pete Hegseth said the Pentagon “stands ready to execute” any decision the president makes about going to war, though he declined to say whether the Pentagon would assist Israel in striking Iran.

“President Trump’s word means something. The world understands that. And at the defence department our job is to stand ready and prepared with options,” Hegseth said. “We already have in many ways . . . re-established deterrence. The question is, in the coming days exactly what direction that goes.”

Should Trump decide to involve the US more directly, he could make the most decisive difference by striking Fordow, a key Iranian nuclear facility buried half a kilometre beneath a mountain, with US B-2 bombers and 30,000-pound GBU-57 massive ordnance penetrators, known as “bunker busters”.

Earlier on Wednesday, Israel said it had hit a production site to make centrifuges to enrich uranium — a process that can yield both nuclear fuel and weapons-grade material — as well as sites manufacturing parts for surface-to-surface and surface-to-air missiles.

Advertisement

Later in the evening, an Iranian missile salvo targeted Tel Aviv and central Israel, with early reports suggesting all the projectiles had been intercepted.

Additional reporting by Demetri Sevastopulo in Washington, Neri Zilber in Tel Aviv and Andrew England in London

Continue Reading

News

What's in the Senate's version of Trump's 'big bill'?

Published

on

What's in the Senate's version of Trump's 'big bill'?

For more politics coverage and analysis, sign up for Here’s the Deal, our weekly politics newsletter, here.


The “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (let’s say “OBBBA”) is President Donald Trump’s signature agenda item in Congress.

It will affect the daily lives of tens of millions of Americans. It is a massive project, with potentially the largest tax cuts, spending cuts and additions to the national debt in U.S. history.

WATCH: Can Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” make it through the Senate?

This week, we have a critical, new development to dive into: the Senate Finance Committee’s own draft of how it wants to handle tax cuts and Medicaid cuts.

Advertisement

(For the most adventurous among us, all 549 pages can be found here.)

The big picture

  • Tax cuts. The Senate draft would add and lengthen some tax cuts, both for businesses and individuals.
  • Green energy cuts. It would slightly delay the elimination of tax credits for solar and wind energy. The Senate draft would push back cuts for nuclear, geothermal and hydropower far more significantly.
  • Medicaid cuts. It would cut Medicaid more than the House-passed bill.

OK, let’s go a little deeper.

A close-up of the words “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” printed on an agenda for a House Rules Committee’s hearing in May on President Donald Trump’s plan for extensive tax cuts. Photo by Nathan Howard/Reuters

Some tax specifics

  • Individual tax rates. Senate and House Republicans are in sync on this. They would make current tax rates permanent. Without action, nearly all individuals will see a tax increase.
  • Standard deductions. The Senate draft would give most adults a bigger tax deduction from the start. Without extending Trump’s 2017 tax cuts, the standard deduction that many individuals take to lower their tax burden is slated to decrease nearly in half at the end of the year. The Senate would not just keep but raise the deduction amounts — to $16,000 for individuals and $32,000 for married couples filing jointly.
  • Child tax credit. The current tax credit of $2,000 per child is set to drop to $1,000 at the end of the year. The Senate would raise the credit to $2,200 permanently. The House would raise the credit to $2,500, but only until 2028.

Green energy

  • A slash to green energy funds. The House and Senate are both moving to eliminate major tax credits for wind and solar from the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act.
  • But the Senate gives a slightly longer phase-out, allowing a partial tax credit for projects that start construction next year or in 2027. The House would end the credit almost as soon as the bill is enacted.

Medicaid

  • Targeting the “provider” tax. This is the most notable cut that the Senate draft is adding. Right now, states use a loophole to help them get more federal dollars for Medicaid. They tax hospitals and doctors (a “provider tax”) and spend that money back with the hospitals and doctors. The more states spend, the more the federal government will match.
  • A cut on this tax. For states that expanded Medicaid, the Senate draft would gradually reduce the maximum amount of provider taxes, which is currently up to 6%, until it reaches a 3.5% threshold by 2031. Many Republicans like this reform, but others say it would significantly cut funds available for Medicaid. The House bill would block new provider taxes.
  • Work requirements. Both the House and Senate would add an 80-hours-a-month work requirement for “able-bodied” adults, or those without disabilities, on Medicaid. The Senate makes one significant change: exempting parents of children under 14 years old from the requirement. (There currently is no federal work requirement for Medicaid.)

What now?

This Senate version is experiencing some initial turbulence.

Four Republican senators have openly questioned the Medicaid cuts in the House bill: Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Jerry Moran of Kansas, Susan Collins of Maine and Josh Hawley of Missouri.

And now, West Virginia Sen. Jim Justice has told a Semafor reporter that he wants the Senate’s Medicaid section to revert to the House version, which would ban new or increased provider taxes.

Hawley told me Tuesday that the cut to the provider tax was a total surprise to him and others. Trump, too, was surprised when alerted about the change and its ramifications for rural hospitals, Hawley said.

Advertisement

This is not unusual. Big bills often have big problems when they are released.

But. Republicans are trying to get this historic legislation through Congress — not just the Senate — in the next two weeks.

At this point in the process, similar large bills (think the Affordable Care Act) usually take months to get through the Senate and back through the House again.

Republicans are determined to pass a version of the bill, but increasingly my sources are saying the question is “not if, but when.”

Support PBS News Hour

Advertisement

Your donation makes a difference in these uncertain times.


Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Video: Inside Trump’s Shifting Stance on Iran

Published

on

Video: Inside Trump’s Shifting Stance on Iran

President Trump spent the first months of his term holding back Israel’s push for an assault on Iran’s nuclear program. With the war underway, he has now expressed support for Israel. Jonathan Swan, a White House reporter for The New York Times, breaks down how the president got to this point.

Continue Reading

Trending