Science

esa-will-pay-an-italian-company-nearly-$50-million-to-design-a-mini-starship

ESA will pay an Italian company nearly $50 million to design a mini-Starship

The European Space Agency signed a contract Monday with Avio, the Italian company behind the small Vega rocket, to begin designing a reusable upper stage capable of flying into orbit, returning to Earth, and launching again.

This is a feat more difficult than recovering and reusing a rocket’s booster stage, something European industry has also yet to accomplish. SpaceX’s workhorse Falcon 9 rocket has a recoverable booster, and several companies in the United States, China, and Europe are trying to replicate SpaceX’s success with the partially reusable Falcon 9.

While other rocket companies try to catch up with the Falcon 9, SpaceX has turned its research and development dollars toward Starship, an enormous fully reusable rocket more than 400 feet (120 meters) tall. Even SpaceX, buttressed by the deep pockets of one of the world’s richest persons, has had trouble perfecting all the technologies required to make Starship work.

But SpaceX is making progress with Starship, so it’s no surprise some other rocket builders want to copy it. The European Space Agency’s contract with Avio is the latest example.

Preliminary design

ESA and Avio signed the deal, worth 40 million euros ($47 million), on the sidelines of the International Astronautical Congress in Sydney. In a statement, Avio said it will “define the requirements, system design, and enabling technologies needed to develop a demonstrator capable of safely returning to Earth and being reused in future missions.”

At the end of the two-year contract, Avio will deliver a preliminary design for the reusable upper stage and the ground infrastructure needed to make it a reality. The preliminary design review is a milestone in the early phases of an aerospace project, typically occurring many years before completion. For example, Europe’s flagship Ariane 6 rocket passed its preliminary design review in 2016, eight years before its first launch.

An artist’s concept released by Avio and ESA shows what the reusable upper stage might look like. The vehicle bears an uncanny resemblance to SpaceX’s Starship, with four flaps affixed to the top and the bottom. The reusable upper stage is mounted atop a booster stage akin to Avio’s solid-fueled Vega rocket. Avio and ESA did not release any specifications on the size or performance of the launcher.

ESA will pay an Italian company nearly $50 million to design a mini-Starship Read More »

150-million-year-old-pterosaur-cold-case-has-finally-been-solved

150 million-year-old pterosaur cold case has finally been solved

Smyth thinks that so few adults show up on the fossil record in this region not only because they were more likely to survive, but also because those that couldn’t were not buried as quickly. Carcasses would float on the water anywhere from days to weeks. As they decomposed, parts would fall to the lagoon bottom. Juveniles were small enough to be swept under and buried quickly by sediments that would preserve them.

Cause of death

The humerus fractures found in Lucky I and Lucky II were especially significant because forelimb injuries are the most common among existing flying vertebrates. The humerus attaches the wing to the body and bears most flight stress, which makes it more prone to trauma. Most humerus fractures happen in flight as opposed to being the result of a sudden impact with a tree or cliff. And these fractures were the only skeletal trauma seen in any of the juvenile pterosaur specimens from Solnhofen.

Evidence suggesting the injuries to the two fledgling pterosaurs happened before death includes the displacement of bones while they were still in flight (something recognizable from storm deaths of extant birds and bats) and the smooth edges of the break, which happens in life, as opposed to the jagged edges of postmortem breaks. There were also no visible signs of healing.

Storms disproportionately affected flying creatures at Solnhofen, which were often taken down by intense winds. Many of Solnhofen’s fossilized vertebrates were pterosaurs and other winged species such as bird ancestor Arachaeopteryx. Flying invertebrates were also doomed.

Even marine invertebrates and fish were threatened by storm conditions, which churned the lagoons and brought deep waters with higher salt levels and low oxygen to the surface. Anything that sank to the bottom was exceptionally preserved because of these same conditions, which were too harsh for scavengers and paused decomposition. Mud kicked up by the storms also helped with the fossilization process by quickly covering these organisms and providing further protection from the elements.

“The same storm events responsible for the burial of these individuals also transported the pterosaurs into the lagoonal basins and were likely the primary cause of their injury and death,” Smyth concluded.

Although Lucky I and Lucky II were decidedly unlucky, the exquisite preservation of their skeletons that shows how they died has finally allowed researchers to solve a case that went cold for over a hundred thousand years.

Current Biology, 2025. DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2025.08.006

150 million-year-old pterosaur cold case has finally been solved Read More »

the-current-war-on-science,-and-who’s-behind-it

The current war on science, and who’s behind it


A vaccine developer and a climate scientist walk into a bar write a book.

Fighting against the anti-science misinformation can feel like fighting a climate-driven wildfire. Credit: Anadolu

We’re about a quarter of the way through the 21st century.

Summers across the global north are now defined by flash floods, droughts, heat waves, uncontainable wildfires, and intensifying named storms, exactly as predicted by Exxon scientists back in the 1970s. The United States secretary of health and human services advocates against using the most effective tool we have to fight the infectious diseases that have ravaged humanity for millennia. People are eagerly lapping up the misinformation spewed and disseminated by AI chatbots, which are only just getting started.

It is against this backdrop that a climate scientist and a vaccine developer teamed up to write Science Under Siege. It is about as grim as you’d expect.

Michael Mann is a climate scientist at the University of Pennsylvania who, in 1998, developed the notorious hockey stick graph, which demonstrated that global surface temperatures were roughly flat until around the year 1900, when they started rising precipitously (and have not stopped). Peter Hotez is a microbiologist and pediatrician at Baylor College of Medicine whose group developed a low-cost, patent-free COVID-19 vaccine using public funds (i.e., not from a pharmaceutical company) and distributed it to almost a hundred million people in India and Indonesia.

Unlikely crusaders

Neither of them anticipated becoming crusaders for their respective fields—and neither probably anticipated that their respective fields would ever actually need crusaders. But they each have taken on the challenge, and they’ve been rewarded for their trouble with condemnation and harassment from Congress and death threats from the public they are trying to serve. In this book, they hope to take what they’ve learned as scientists and science communicators in our current world and parlay that into a call to arms.

Mann and Hotez have more in common than being pilloried all over the internet. Although they trained in disparate disciplines, their fields are now converging (as if they weren’t each threatening enough on their own). Climate change is altering the habitats, migrations, and reproductive patterns of pathogen-bearing wildlife like bats, mosquitoes, and other insects. It is causing the migration of humans as well. Our increasing proximity to these species in both space and time can increase the opportunities for us to catch diseases from them.

Yet Mann and Hotez insist that a third scourge is even more dangerous than these two combined. In their words:

It is currently impossible for global leaders to take the urgent actions necessary to respond to the climate crisis and pandemic threats because they are thwarted by a common enemy—antiscience—that is politically and ideologically motivated opposition to any science that threatens powerful special interests and their political agendas. Unless we find a way to overcome antiscience, humankind will face its gravest threat yet—the collapse of civilization as we know it.

And they point to an obvious culprit: “There is, unquestionably, a coordinated, concerted attack on science by today’s Republican Party.”

They’ve helpfully characterized “the five principal forces of antiscience “ into alliterative groups: (1) plutocrats and their political action committees, (2) petrostates and their politicians and polluters, (3) fake and venal professionals—physicians and professors, (4) propagandists, especially those with podcasts, and (5) the press. The general tactic is that (1) and (2) hire (3) to generate deceitful and inflammatory talking points, which are then disseminated by all-too-willing members of (4) and (5).

There is obviously a lot of overlap among these categories; Elon Musk, Vladimir Putin, Rupert Murdoch, and Donald Trump can all jump between a number of these bins. As such, the ideas and arguments presented in the book are somewhat redundant, as are the words used. Far too many things are deemed “ironic” (i.e., the same people who deny and dismiss the notion of human-caused climate change claimed that Democrats generated hurricanes Helene and Milton to target red states in October 2024) or “risible” (see Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s claim that Dr. Peter Hotez sought to make it a felony to criticize Anthony Fauci).

A long history

Antiscience propaganda has been used by authoritarians for over a century. Stalin imprisoned physicists and attacked geneticists while famously enacting the nonsensical agricultural ideas of Trofim Lysenko, who thought genes were a “bourgeois invention.” This led to the starvation of millions of people in the Soviet Union and China.

Why go after science? The scientific method is the best means we have of discovering how our Universe works, and it has been used to reveal otherwise unimaginable facets of reality. Scientists are generally thought of as authorities possessing high levels of knowledge, integrity, and impartiality. Discrediting science and scientists is thus an essential first step for authoritarian regimes to then discredit any other types of learning and truth and destabilize their societies.

The authors trace the antiscience messaging on COVID, which followed precisely the same arc as that on climate change except condensed into a matter of months instead of decades. The trajectory started by maintaining that the threat was not real. When that was no longer tenable, it quickly morphed into “OK, this is happening, and it may actually get pretty bad for some subset of people, but we should definitely not take collective action to address it because that would be bad for the economy.”

It finally culminated in preying upon people’s understandable fears in these very scary times by claiming that this is all the fault of scientists who are trying to take away your freedom, be that bodily autonomy and the ability to hang out with your loved ones (COVID) or your plastic straws, hamburgers, and SUVs (climate change).

This mis- and disinformation has prevented us from dealing with either catastrophe by misleading people about the seriousness, or even existence, of the threats and/or harping on their hopeless nature, sapping us of the will to do anything to counter them. These tactics also sow division among people, practically ensuring that we won’t band together to take the kind of collective action essential to addressing enormous, complex problems. It is all quite effective. Mann and Hotez conclude that “the future of humankind and the health of our planet now depend on surmounting the dark forces of antiscience.”

Why, you might wonder, would the plutocrats, polluters, and politicians of the Republican Party be so intent on undermining science and scientists, lying to the public, fearmongering, and stoking hatred among their constituents? The same reason as always: to hold onto their money and power. The means to that end is thwarting regulations. Yes, it’s nefarious, but also so disappointingly… banal.

The authors are definitely preaching exclusively to the converted. They are understandably angry at what has been done to them and somewhat mocking of those who don’t see things their way. They end by trying to galvanize their followers into taking action to reverse the current course.

They advise that the best—really, the only—thing we can do now to effect change is to vote and hope for favorable legislation. “Only political change, including massive turnout to support politicians who favor people over plutocrats, can ultimately solve this larger systemic problem,” they write. But since our president and vice president don’t even believe in or acknowledge “systemic problems,” the future is not looking too bright.

The current war on science, and who’s behind it Read More »

scientists-want-to-treat-complex-bone-fractures-with-a-bone-healing-gun

Scientists want to treat complex bone fractures with a bone-healing gun

After examining a few candidate formulations, the team found the right material. “We used a biocompatible thermoplastic called polycaprolactone and hydroxyapatite as base materials,” Lee said. Polycaprolactone was chosen because it is an FDA-approved material that degrades in the body within a few months after implantation. The hydroxyapatite, on the other hand, supports bone-tissue regeneration. Lee’s team experimented with various proportions of these two ingredients and finally nailed the formulation that checked all the boxes: It extruded at a relatively harmless 60° Celsius, the mix was mechanically sound, it adhered to the bone well, and it degraded over time.

Once the bone-healing bullets were ready, the team tested them on rabbits. Rabbits with broken femurs treated with Lee’s healing gun recovered faster than those treated with bone cement, which is the closest commercially available alternative. But there is still a lot to do before the healing gun can be tested on humans.

Skill issues

While the experiment on rabbits revealed new bone tissues forming around the implants created with the healing gun, their slow degradation of the implanted material prevented the full restoration of bone tissues. Another improvement Lee plans involves adding antibiotics to the formulation. The implant, he said, will release the drugs over time to prevent infections.

Then there’s the issue of load bearing. Rabbits are fine as test subjects, but they are rather light. “To evaluate the potential to use this technology on humans, we need to look into its long-term safety in large animal models,” Lee said.

Beyond the questions about the material, the level of skill required to operate this healing gun seems rather high.

Extrusion-based 3D printers, the ones that work more or less like very advanced hot glue guns, usually use guiding rods or rails for precise printing head positioning. If those rods or rails are warped, even slightly, the accuracy of your prints will most likely suffer. Achieving comparable precision with a handheld device might be a bit difficult, even for a skilled surgeon. “It is true that the system requires practice,” Lee said. “We may need to integrate it with a guiding mechanism that would position the head of the device precisely. This could be our next-gen bone printing device.”

Device, 2025.  DOI: 10.1016/j.device.2025.100873

Scientists want to treat complex bone fractures with a bone-healing gun Read More »

50+-scientific-societies-sign-letter-objecting-to-trump-executive-order

50+ scientific societies sign letter objecting to Trump executive order

Last month, the Trump administration issued an executive order asserting political control over grant funding, including all federally supported research. In general, the executive order inserts a layer of political control over both the announcement of new funding opportunities and the approval of individual grants. Now, a coalition of more than 50 scientific and medical organizations is firing back, issuing a letter to the US Congress expressing grave concerns over the order’s provisions and urging Congress to protect the integrity of what has long been an independent, merit-based, peer-review system for awarding federal grants.

As we previously reported, the order requires that any announcement of funding opportunities be reviewed by the head of the agency or someone they designate, which means a political appointee will have the ultimate say over what areas of science the US funds. Individual grants will also require clearance from a political appointee and “must, where applicable, demonstrably advance the President’s policy priorities.”

The order also instructs agencies to formalize the ability to cancel previously awarded grants at any time if they’re considered “no longer advance agency priorities.” Until a system is in place to enforce the new rules, agencies are forbidden from starting new funding programs.

In short, the new rules would mean that all federal science research would need to be approved by a political appointee who may have no expertise in the relevant areas, and the research can be canceled at any time if the political winds change. It would mark the end of a system that has enabled US scientific leadership for roughly 70 years.

50+ scientific societies sign letter objecting to Trump executive order Read More »

fiji’s-ants-might-be-the-canary-in-the-coal-mine-for-the-insect-apocalypse

Fiji’s ants might be the canary in the coal mine for the insect apocalypse


A new genetic technique lets museum samples track population dynamics.

In late 2017, a study by Krefeld Entomological Society looked at protected areas across Germany and discovered that two-thirds of the insect populations living in there had vanished over the last 25 years. The results spurred the media to declare we’re living through an “insect apocalypse,” but the reasons behind their absence were unclear. Now, a joint team of Japanese and Australian scientists have completed a new, multi-year study designed to get us some answers.

Insect microcosm

“In our work, we focused on ants because we have systematic ways for collecting them,” says Alexander Mikheyev, an evolutionary biologist at the Australian National University. “They are also a group with the right level of diversity, where you have enough species to do comparative studies.” Choosing the right location, he explained, was just as important. “We did it in Fiji, because Fiji had the right balance between isolation—which gave us a discrete group of animals to study—but at the same time was diverse enough to make comparisons,” Mikheyev adds.

Thus, the Fijian archipelago, with its 330 islands, became the model the team used to get some insights into insect population dynamics. A key difference from the earlier study was that Mikheyev and his colleagues could look at those populations across thousands of years, not just the last 25.

“Most of the previous studies looked at actual observational data—things we could come in and measure,” Mikheyev explains. The issue with those studies was that they could only account for the last hundred years or so, because that’s how long we have been systematically collecting insect samples. “We really wanted to understand what happened in the longer time frame,” Mikheyev says.

To do this, his team focused on community genomics—studying the collective genetic material of entire groups of organisms. The challenge is that this would normally require collecting thousands of ants belonging to hundreds of species across the entire Fijian archipelago. Given that only a little over 100 out of 330 islands in Fiji are permanently inhabited, this seemed like an insurmountable challenge.

To go around it, the team figured they could run its tests on ants already collected in Fijian museums. But that came with its own set of difficulties.

DNA pieces

Unfortunately, the quality of DNA that could be obtained from museum collections was really bad. From the perspective of DNA preservation, the ants were obtained and stored in horrific conditions, since the idea was to showcase them for visitors, not run genetic studies. “People were catching them in malaise traps,” Mikheyev says. “A malaise trap is basically a bottle of alcohol that sits somewhere in Fiji for a month. Those samples had horribly fragmented, degraded DNA.”

To work with this degraded genetic material, the team employed a technique they called high-throughput museumomics, a relatively new technique that looks at genetic differences across a genome without sequencing the whole thing. DNA sampled from multiple individuals was cut and marked with unique tags at the same repeated locations, a bit like using bookmarks to pinpoint the same page or passage in different issues of the same book. Then, the team sequenced short DNA fragments following the tag to look for differences between them, allowing them to evaluate the genetic diversity within a population.  “We developed a series of methods that actually allowed us to harness these museum-grade specimens for population genetics,” Mikheyev explains.

But the trouble didn’t end there. Differences among Fijian ant taxa are based on their appearance, not genetic analysis. For years, researchers were collecting various ants and determining their species by looking at them. This led to 144 species belonging to 40 genera. For Mikheyev’s team, the first step was to look at the genomes in the samples and see if these species divisions were right. It turned out that they were mostly correct, but some species had to be split, while others were lumped together. At the end, the team confirmed that 127 species were represented among their samples.

Overall, the team analyzed more than 4,000 specimens of ants collected over the past decade or so. And gradually, a turbulent history of Fijian ants started to emerge from the data.

The first colonists

The art of reconstructing the history of entire populations from individual genetic sequences relies on comparing them to each other thoroughly and running a whole lot of computer simulations. “We had multiple individuals per population,” Mikheyev explains. “Let’s say we look at this population and find it has essentially no diversity. It suggests that it very recently descended from a small number of individuals.” When the contrary was true and the diversity was high, the team assumed it indicated the population had been stable for a long time.

With the DNA data in hand, the team simulated how populations of ants would evolve over thousands of years under various conditions, and picked scenarios that best matched the genetic diversity results it obtained from real ants. “We identified multiple instances of colonization—broadscale evolutionary events that gave rise to the Fijian fauna that happened in different timeframes,” Mikheyev says. There was a total of at least 65 colonization events.

The first ants, according to Mikheyev, arrived at Fiji millions of years ago and gave rise to 88 endemic Fijian ant species we have today. These ants most likely evolved from a single ancestor and then diverged from their mainland relatives. Then, a further 23 colonization events introduced ants that were native to a broader Pacific region. These ants, the team found, were a mixture of species that colonized Fiji naturally and ones that were brought by the first human settlers, the Lapita people, who arrived around 3,000 years ago.

The arrival of humans also matched the first declines in endemic Fijian ant species.

Slash and burn

“In retrospect, these declines are not really surprising,” Mikheyev says. The first Fijian human colonists didn’t have the same population density as we have now, but they did practice things like slash-and-burn agriculture, where forests were cut down, left to dry, and burned to make space for farms and fertilize the soil. “And you know, not every ant likes to live in a field, especially the ones that evolved to live in a forest,” Mikheyev adds. But the declines in Fijian endemic ant species really accelerated after the first contact with the Europeans.

The first explorers in the 17th and 18th centuries, like Abel Tasman and James Cook, charted some of the Fijian islands but did not land there. The real apocalypse for Fijian ants began in the 19th century, when European sandalwood traders started visiting the archipelago on a regular basis and ultimately connected it to the global trade networks.

Besides the firearms they often traded for sandalwood with local chiefs, the traders also brought fire ants. “Fire ants are native to Latin America, and it’s a common invasive species extremely well adapted to habitats we create: lawns or clear-cut fields,” Mikheyev says. Over the past couple of centuries, his team saw a massive increase in fire ant populations, combined with accelerating declines in 79 percent of endemic Fijian ant species.

Signs of apocalypse

To Mikheyev, Fiji was just a proving ground to test the methods of working with museum-grade samples. “Now we know this approach works and we can start leveraging collections found in museums around the world—all of them can tell us stories about places where they were collected,” Mikheyev says. His ultimate goal is to look for the signs of the insect apocalypse, or any other apocalypse of a similar kind, worldwide.

But the question is whether what’s happening is really that bad? After all, not all ants seem to be in decline. Perhaps what we see is just a case of a better-adapted species taking over—natural selection happening before our eyes?

“Sure, we can just live with fire ants all along without worrying about the kind of beautiful biodiversity that evolution has created on Fiji,” Mikheyev says. “But I feel like if we just go with that philosophy, we’re really going to be irreparably losing important and interesting parts of our ecology.” If the current trends persist, he argues, we might lose endemic Fijian ants forever. “And this would make our world worse, in many ways,” Mikheyev says.

Science, 2025. DOI: 10.1126/science.ads3004

Photo of Jacek Krywko

Jacek Krywko is a freelance science and technology writer who covers space exploration, artificial intelligence research, computer science, and all sorts of engineering wizardry.

Fiji’s ants might be the canary in the coal mine for the insect apocalypse Read More »

study:-planned-budget-cuts-would-hurt-drug-development-badly

Study: Planned budget cuts would hurt drug development badly

It turns out that nearly 60 percent of the patents cite NIH-funded research. And here, the at-risk grants put in a very good showing, with just over half of the patents citing at least one at-risk grant. Note that many grants will have citations from both categories; to get a better sense, the researchers looked for patents where at least a quarter of the papers cited arose from NIH-funded research. For any grant, that number was a bit over 35 percent; for at-risk grants, it was about 12 percent.

Looking at specific examples, the researchers found that some of the approved drugs that relied on at-risk research were used for cancer treatments and genetic disorders. In other words, treatments that are likely to have a significant impact on public health. There are a couple of reasons to think that this is an underestimation of the impact, as well. To begin with, their source data on funding priorities stops at 2007, leaving a roughly 15-year gap where research funding can’t be analyzed, but patents are still being filed.

In addition, drugs are just a small part of the potential impact of NIH research. “We excluded a wide range of important medical advances that may also build on NIH-funded research,” the researchers acknowledge. “These include vaccines, gene and cell therapies, and other biologic drugs; diagnostic technologies and medical devices; as well as innovations in medical procedures, patient care practices, and surgical techniques.” Beyond the obvious implications for public health, these sorts of patents can result in lots of economic activity, including the launching of entirely new businesses.

Beyond informing current debates about science funding, the research makes a larger point about scientific progress. We tend to focus on the major leaps forward and the high-profile scientists that drive them, as the upcoming Nobel Prizes highlight. But the reality is that most advances, especially in biology, are built on a broad intellectual foundation of lower-profile work that may require years for someone to find a way to apply it to anything patentable. Broad cuts like these may mean that the scientific superstars will still walk away with grants, while leaving a field devastated by having parts of this foundation knocked out from under it.

Science, 2025. DOI: 10.1126/science.aeb1564 (About DOIs).

Study: Planned budget cuts would hurt drug development badly Read More »

a-“cosmic-carpool”-is-traveling-to-a-distant-space-weather-observation-post

A “cosmic carpool” is traveling to a distant space weather observation post


“It’s like a bus. You wait for one and then three come at the same time.”

NASA’s IMAP spacecraft (top), the Carruthers Geocorona Observatory (left), and NOAA’s first operational space weather satellite (right) shared a ride to space on a Falcon 9 rocket Wednesday. Credit: SpaceX

Scientists loaded three missions worth nearly $1.6 billion on a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket for launch Wednesday, toward an orbit nearly a million miles from Earth, to measure the supersonic stream of charged particles emanating from the Sun.

One of the missions, from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), will beam back real-time observations of the solar wind to provide advance warning of geomagnetic storms that could affect power grids, radio communications, GPS navigation, air travel, and satellite operations.

The other two missions come from NASA, with research objectives that include studying the boundary between the Solar System and interstellar space and observing the rarely seen outermost layer of our own planet’s atmosphere.

All three spacecraft were mounted to the top of a Falcon 9 rocket for liftoff at 7: 30 am EDT (11: 30 UTC) on Wednesday from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The rocket arced on a trajectory heading east from Florida’s Space Coast, shed its reusable first stage booster for a landing offshore, then fired its upper stage engine twice to propel the trio of missions into deep space.

A few minutes later, each of the spacecraft separated from the Falcon 9 to begin a multi-month journey toward their observing locations in halo orbits around the L1 Lagrange point, a gravitational balance point roughly 900,000 miles (1.5 million kilometers) from Earth toward the Sun. The combined pull from the Earth and Sun at this location provides a stable region for satellites to operate in, and a good location for instruments designed for solar science.

Liftoff of IMAP and its two co-passengers on a Falcon 9 rocket. Credit: SpaceX

Seeing the big picture

The primary mission launched on Wednesday is called the Interstellar Mapping and Acceleration Probe (IMAP). The spin-stabilized IMAP spacecraft is shaped like a donut, with a diameter of about 8 feet (2.4 meters) and 10 science instruments looking inward toward the Sun and outward toward the edge of the heliosphere, the teardrop-shaped magnetic bubble blown outward by the solar wind.

At the edge of the heliosphere, the solar wind runs up against the interstellar medium, the gas, dust, and radiation in the space between the stars. This boundary remains a poorly understood frontier in space science, but it’s important because the heliosphere protects the Solar System from damaging galactic cosmic rays.

“IMAP is a mission of firsts,” said Nicky Fox, associate administrator of NASA’s science mission directorate. “It’ll be the first spacecraft dedicated to mapping the heliosphere’s outer boundary, a key piece in the heliophysics puzzle about the Sun’s influence on our Solar System. To do this, IMAP will spin every 15 seconds to measure the invisible using a very comprehensive suite of revolutionary instruments.”

During each rotation, IMAP’s sensors will scoop up all sorts of stuff: ions traveling 1 million miles per hour in the solar wind, interstellar dust particles, and energetic neutral atoms kicked back into the Solar System from the edge of the heliosphere.

“These energetic neutral atoms act as cosmic messengers,” said David McComas, IMAP’s principal investigator from Princeton University. “They’re unaffected by magnetic fields so they can propagate all the way in from the boundaries to Earth’s orbit and be measured by IMAP.”

Tracking these energetic neutral atoms will allow scientists to map the boundary of the heliosphere and what shapes it. The Sun’s movement through the Milky Way galaxy forms a shock wave on the front side of the heliosphere, similar to the wave created by the bow of a ship moving through water.

Artist’s illustration of the IMAP spacecraft in orbit. Credit: NASA

“We ended up with this fabulous observatory that measures everything,” McComas said. “The particles coming out from the Sun are moving out in the solar wind to get to the outer heliosphere. Some fraction of them become neutralized and come right back, and we observe them a few years later as ENAs (energetic neutral atoms). So, we’re really observing the entire life cycle of this particle energization and how it interacts at the boundaries of the heliosphere.”

IMAP follows a much smaller mission, named IBEX, that carried just two instruments to begin probing the edge of the heliosphere in 2008. IBEX discovered an unexpected ribbon-like pattern of energetic neutral emissions coming from the front of the heliosphere. Scientists have developed several theories to explain the ribbon signature. One of the theories postulates that the ribbon represents a group of particles that somehow leaked from the heliosphere and bounced around interstellar space before returning to the Solar System.

“It was found that interstellar matter, particles, and neutrals streaming in from outside the Solar System, actually… have a significant effect in how the entire heliosphere behaves,” said Shri Kanekal, IMAP’s mission scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center.

IBEX’s discoveries fueled enthusiasm among space scientists for a more sophisticated follow-up mission like IMAP. NASA selected IMAP for development in 2018, and the $782 million mission will spend at least two years conducting scientific observations. The spacecraft was built at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory in Laurel, Maryland.

The ribbon remains one of IBEX’s biggest discoveries. It refers to a vast, diagonal swath of energetic neutrals, painted across the front of the heliosphere. Credit: NASA/IBEX

“Immense value”

Two years after NASA approved IMAP for development, the agency’s heliophysics division selected another mission to head for the L1 Lagrange point. This smaller spacecraft, called the Carruthers Geocorona Observatory, hitched a ride to space with IMAP on Wednesday.

The $97 million Carruthers mission carries two co-aligned ultraviolet imagers designed for simultaneous observations of Earth’s exosphere, a tenuous cloud of hydrogen gas that fades into the airless void of outer space about halfway to the Moon. The hydrogen atoms in the exosphere generate a faint glow called the geocorona, which is only detectable in ultraviolet light at great distances. Images of the entire geocorona can’t be collected from a satellite in Earth orbit.

The mission is named for George Carruthers, an engineer and solar physicist who developed an ultraviolet camera placed on the Moon by the Apollo 16 astronauts in 1972. This camera captured the first view of the geocorona, a term coined by Carruthers himself.

The 531-pound (241-kilogram) Carruthers observatory was built by BAE Systems, with instruments provided by the University of California Berkeley’s Space Sciences Lab.

There’s a lot for scientists to learn from the Carruthers mission, because they know little about the exosphere or geocorona.

“We actually don’t know exactly how big it is,” said Lara Waldrop, the mission’s principal investigator from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. “We don’t know whether it’s spherical or oval, how much it changes over time or even the density of its constituent hydrogen atoms.”

What scientists do know is that the exosphere plays an important role in shaping how solar storms affect the Earth. The exosphere is also the path by which the Earth is (very) slowly losing atomic hydrogen from water vapor lofted high into the atmosphere. “This process is extremely slow at Earth, and I’m talking billions of years. It is certainly nothing to worry about,” Waldrop ensures.

This image illustrates the location of the Sun-Earth L1 Lagrange point, where IMAP, Carruthers, and SWFO-L1 will operate. Credit: NOAA

The final spacecraft aboard Wednesday’s launch is the world’s first operational satellite dedicated to monitoring space weather. This $692 million mission is called the Space Weather Follow On-L1, or SWFO-L1, and serves as an “early warning beacon” for the potentially devastating effects of geomagnetic storms, said Irene Parker, deputy assistant administrator for systems at NOAA’s National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service.

NOAA’s previous satellites peer down at Earth from low-Earth orbit or geosynchronous orbit, gathering data for numerical weather models and tracking the real-time movement of hurricanes and severe storms. Until now, NOAA has relied upon a hodgepodge of research satellites to monitor the solar wind upstream from Earth. SWFO-L1, also built by BAE Systems, is the first mission designed from the start for real-time, around-the-clock solar wind observations.

“We’ll use SWFO-L1 to buy power grid, airline, and satellite operators precious time to act before billion-dollar storms strike,” said Clinton Wallace, director of NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center.

Once on station around the L1 Lagrange point, the satellite will be renamed SOLAR-1 before NOAA declares it operational in mid-2026. The platform hosts four instruments, one of which is a coronagraph to detect the massive eruptions from the Sun that spark geomagnetic storms. The other instruments will sample solar particles as they pass over the spacecraft about a half-hour before they reach our planet.

These instruments are akin to weather satellites that detect a hurricane’s formation over the remote ocean and hurricane hunters that take direct measurements of the storm to assess its intensity before landfall, NOAA said.

Bundling IMAP, Carruthers, and SWFO-L1 onto the same rocket saved at least tens of millions of dollars in launch costs. Normally, they would have needed three different rockets.

Rideshare missions to low-Earth orbit are becoming more common, but spacecraft departing for more distant destinations like the L1 Lagrange point are rare. Getting all three missions on the same launch required extensive planning, a stroke of luck, and fortuitous timing.

“This is the ultimate cosmic carpool,” said Joe Westlake, director of NASA’s heliophysics division. “These three missions heading out to the Sun-Earth L1 point riding along together provide immense value for the American taxpayer.”

“It’s like a bus,” Fox said. “You wait for one and then three come at the same time.”

Photo of Stephen Clark

Stephen Clark is a space reporter at Ars Technica, covering private space companies and the world’s space agencies. Stephen writes about the nexus of technology, science, policy, and business on and off the planet.

A “cosmic carpool” is traveling to a distant space weather observation post Read More »

scientists-catch-a-shark-threesome-on-camera

Scientists catch a shark threesome on camera

Three sharks, two cameras

Three leopard sharks mating - near surface

Moving the action closer to the surface. Credit: Hugo Lassauce/UniSC-Aquarium des Lagons

Lassauce had two GoPro Hero 5 cameras ready at hand, albeit with questionable battery life. That’s why the video footage has two interruptions to the action: once when he had to switch cameras after getting a “low battery” signal, and a second time when he voluntarily stopped filming to conserve the second camera’s battery. Not much happened for 55 minutes, after all, and he wanted to be sure to capture the pivotal moments in the sequence. Lassauce succeeded and was rewarded with triumphant cheers from his fellow marine biologists on the boat, who knew full well the rarity of what had just been documented for posterity.

The lengthy pre-copulation stage involved all three sharks motionless on the seafloor for nearly an hour, after which the female started swimming with one male shark biting onto each of her pectoral fins. A few minutes later, the first male made his move, “penetrating the female’s cloaca with his left clasper.” Claspers are modified pelvic fins capable of transferring sperm. After the first male shark finished, he lay motionless while the second male held onto the female’s other fin. Then the other shark moved in, did his business, went motionless, and the female shark swam away. The males also swam away soon afterward.

Apart from the scientific first, documenting the sequence is a good indicator that this particular area is a critical mating habitat for leopard sharks, and could lead to better conservation strategies, as well as artificial insemination efforts to “rewild” leopard sharks in Australia and several other countries. “It’s surprising and fascinating that two males were involved sequentially on this occasion,” said co-author Christine Dudgeon, also of UniSC, adding, “From a genetic diversity perspective, we want to find out how many fathers contribute to the batches of eggs laid each year by females.”

Journal of Ethology, 2025. DOI: 10.1007/s10164-025-00866-4 (About DOIs).

Scientists catch a shark threesome on camera Read More »

judge-lets-construction-on-an-offshore-wind-farm-resume

Judge lets construction on an offshore wind farm resume

That did not, however, stop the administration from trying again, this time targeting a development called Revolution Wind, located a bit further north along the Atlantic coast. This time, however, the developer quickly sued, leading to Monday’s ruling. According to Reuters, after a two-hour court hearing at the District Court of DC, Judge Royce Lamberth termed the administration’s actions “the height of arbitrary and capricious” and issued a preliminary injunction against the hold on Revolution Wind’s construction. As a result, Orsted can restart work immediately.

The decision provides a strong indication of how Lamberth is likely to rule if the government pursues a full trial on the case. And while the Trump administration could appeal, it’s unlikely to see this injunction lifted unless it takes the case all the way to the Supreme Court. Given that Revolution Wind was already 80 percent complete, the case may become moot before it gets that far.

Judge lets construction on an offshore wind farm resume Read More »

what-climate-targets?-top-fossil-fuel-producing-nations-keep-boosting-output

What climate targets? Top fossil fuel producing nations keep boosting output


Top producers are planning to mine and drill even more of the fuels in 2030.

Machinery transfers coal at a port in China’s Chongqing municipality on April 20. Credit: STR/AFP via Getty Images

The last two years have witnessed the hottest one in history, some of the worst wildfire seasons across Canada, Europe and South America and deadly flooding and heat waves throughout the globe. Over that same period, the world’s largest fossil fuel producers have expanded their planned output for the future, setting humanity on an even more dangerous path into a warmer climate.

Governments now expect to produce more than twice as much coal, oil and gas in 2030 as would be consistent with the goals of the Paris Agreement, according to a report released Monday. That level is slightly higher than what it was in 2023, the last time the biennial Production Gap report was published.

The increase is driven by a slower projected phaseout of coal and higher outlook for gas production by some of the top producers, including China and the United States.

“The Production Gap Report has long served as a mirror held up to the world, revealing the stark gap between fossil fuel production plans and international climate goals,” said Christiana Figueres, former executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, in a foreword to the report. “This year’s findings are especially alarming. Despite record climate impacts, a winning economic case for renewables, and strong societal appetite for action, governments continue to expand fossil fuel production beyond what the climate can withstand.”

The peer-reviewed report, written by researchers at the Stockholm Environment Institute, Climate Analytics and the International Institute for Sustainable Development, aims to focus attention on the supply side of the climate equation and the government policies that encourage or steer fossil fuel production.

“Governments have such a significant role in setting up the rules of the game,” said Neil Grant, a senior expert at Climate Analytics and one of the authors, in a briefing for reporters. “What this report shows is most governments are not using that influence for good.”

Chart showing growth in fossil fuel production

Credit: Inside Climate News

The report’s blaring message is that these subsidies, tax incentives, permitting and other policies have largely failed to adapt to the climate targets nations have adopted. The result is a split screen. Governments say they will cut their own climate-warming pollution, yet they plan to continue producing the fossil fuels that are driving that pollution far beyond what their climate targets would allow.

The report singles out the United States as “the starkest case of a country recommitting to fossil fuels.” The data for the United States, which draws on the latest projections of the US Energy Information Administration, does not reflect most of the policies the Trump administration and Congress have put in place this year to promote fossil fuels.

Since January, Congress has enacted billions of dollars in new subsidies to oil and gas companies while the Trump administration has forced retiring coal plants to continue operating, expanded mining and drilling access on public lands, delayed deadlines for drillers to comply with limits on methane pollution and fast-tracked fossil fuel permitting while setting roadblocks for building wind and solar energy projects.

In response to the report, White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers said in an email, “As promised, President Trump ended Joe Biden’s war on American energy and unleashed American energy on day one in the best interest of our country’s economic and national security. He will continue to restore American’s energy dominance.”

Chart showing planned fuel production

Credit: Inside Climate News

The Production Gap report assessed the government plans or projections of 20 of the world’s top producers. Some have state-owned enterprises while others are dominated by publicly listed companies. The countries, which were chosen for their production levels, availability of data and presence of clear climate targets, account for more than 80 percent of fossil fuel output. The report models total global production by scaling the data up to account for the rest.

All but three of the 20 nations are planning or projecting increased production in 2030 of at least one fossil fuel. Eleven now project higher production of at least one fuel in 2030 than they did two years ago.

Expected global output of coal, oil, and gas for 2030 is now 120 percent more than what would be consistent with pathways to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) and 77 percent higher than scenarios to keep warming to less than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit). The greater the warming, the more severe the consequences will be on extreme weather, rising seas and other impacts.

While previous installments of the report were published under the auspices of the United Nations Environment Program, this year’s version was issued independently.

In a sign of the world’s continuing failure to limit fossil fuel use, the modeling scenarios the report uses are becoming obsolete. Because nations have continued to burn more coal, gas and oil every year, future cuts would now need to be even steeper than what is reflected in the report to keep climate targets within reach.

“We’re already going into sort of the red and burning up our debt,” Grant said.

Three nations alone—China, the United States and Russia—were responsible for more than half of “extraction-based” emissions in 2022, or the pollution that comes when the fossil fuels are burned.

Ira Joseph, a senior research associate at the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University, who was not involved in the report, said its focus on supply highlights an important part of understanding global energy markets.

“Any type of tax breaks or subsidies or however you want to call them lowers the break-even cost for producing oil and gas,” Joseph said. Lower costs mean more supply, which in turn lowers prices and spurs more demand. The projections and plans the report is based on, Joseph said, reflect this global give and take.

Chart showing fossil fuel increase by country

Credit: Inside Climate News

The biggest changes since the last report come from a slower projected decline in China’s coal mining and faster expected growth in gas production in the United States. Smaller producers are also expecting sharper increases in gas output.

The report did highlight some bright spots. Two additional governments—Brazil and Colombia—are developing plans that would align fossil fuel production with climate goals, bringing the total to six out of the 20. Germany now expects a more accelerated phase-out of coal production. China is speeding its deployment of wind and solar energy. Some countries have also reduced subsidies for fossil fuels.

Yet these measures clearly fall far short, the report said.

The authors called on governments to coordinate their policies and plan for how they can collectively lower production in a way that keeps climate targets within reach without shocking the economies that depend on the jobs and revenue provided by mining, drilling, and processing the fuels. They pointed to a handful of efforts—called Just Energy Transition Partnerships—to provide financing from wealthy countries to support phasing out coal in developing or emerging economies. These programs have struggled to mobilize much money, however, and the Trump administration has withdrawn the United States from them.

Grant said the policies indicate that government officials are failing to adapt to a more uncertain future.

“Change doesn’t happen in straight lines, but I think if you look at the Production Gap report this year, what you see is that many governments are still thinking in straight lines,” Grant said.

The policies the team examined foresee fossil fuel use remaining steady or declining gradually. The result, Grant argued, could be one of two scenarios: Either fossil fuel use remains high for years, in line with these production plans, or it declines more quickly and governments are unprepared for the sudden drop in sales.

“Those would lead to either climate chaos or significant negative economic impacts on countries,” Grant said. “So we need to try to avoid both of those. And the way to do that is to try to align our fossil fuel production plans with our climate goals.”

This story originally appeared on Inside Climate News.

Photo of Inside Climate News

What climate targets? Top fossil fuel producing nations keep boosting output Read More »

despite-congressional-threat,-national-academies-releases-new-climate-report

Despite congressional threat, National Academies releases new climate report

The National Academies responded to the EPA’s actions by saying it would prepare a report of its own, which it did despite the threat of a congressional investigation into its work. And the result undercuts the EPA’s claims even further.

Blunt and to the point

The NAS report does not mess around with subtleties, going straight to the main point: Everything we’ve learned since the endangerment finding confirms that it was on target. “EPA’s 2009 finding that the human-caused emissions of greenhouse gases threaten human health and welfare was accurate, has stood the test of time, and is now reinforced by even stronger evidence,” its authors conclude.

That evidence includes a better understanding of the climate itself, with the report citing “Longer records, improved and more robust observational networks, and analytical and methodological advances” that have both allowed us to better detect the changes in the climate, and more reliably assign them to the effects of greenhouse gases. The events attributed to climate change are also clearly harming the welfare of the US public through things like limiting agricultural productivity gains, damage from wildfires, losses due to water scarcity, and general stresses on our infrastructure.

But it’s not just the indirect effects we have to worry about. The changing climate is harming us more directly as well:

Climate change intensifies risks to humans from exposures to extreme heat, ground-level ozone, airborne particulate matter, extreme weather events, and airborne allergens, affecting incidence of cardiovascular, respiratory, and other diseases. Climate change has increased exposure to pollutants from wildfire smoke and dust, which has been linked to adverse health effects. The increasing severity of some extreme events has contributed to injury, illness, and death in affected communities. Health impacts related to climate-sensitive infectious diseases—such as those carried by insects and contaminated water—have increased.

Moreover, it notes that one of the government’s arguments—that US emissions are too small to be meaningful—doesn’t hold water. Even small increments of change will increase the risk of damaging events for decades to come, and push the world closer to hitting potential tipping points in the climate system. Therefore, cutting US emissions will directly reduce those risks.

Despite congressional threat, National Academies releases new climate report Read More »