Space claw! Sun shoots powerful flare that knocks out shortwave radio (video)

Elizabeth Howell
Wed, February 8, 2023 

A powerful solar flare bursts out from the sun on Feb. 7, 2023.

A medium-sized solar flare briefly blocked shortwave radio Tuesday (Feb. 7).

The active sun fired off several solar flares in recent days, with one causing a momentary lapse in shortwave communications over the Pacific Ocean at 6:07 p.m. EST (2307 GMT), according to SpaceWeather.com.

The originating area is a huge Earth-facing sunspot, AR3213, which currently stretches across 62,000 miles (100,000 km) of the surface of the sun. Magnetic tangling in the sunspot caused the lines to "snap," firing off charged solar particles towards our planet via a medium-class (M6) flare.

Related: Strange unprecedented vortex spotted around the sun's north pole

The sun is climbing towards a peak in its 11-year cycle that it should reach in 2025. There's ample evidence of the sun firing off flares already in pictures and videos from sun-gazing satellites, like NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory. These were shared extensively by users on Twitter.

Most solar activity is harmless and just causes brief interruptions in shortwave, but the sun is able to generate more powerful bursts of energy that can knock out satellites or other infrastructure.

RELATED STORIES:

— 2 massive 'active regions' on the sun have rotated into Earth's view

— Tiny, bright flashes on the sun could help scientists predict solar flares

— As sun's most active regions turn toward Earth, potential for violent solar activity builds

As such, NASA and the European Space Agency (ESA) partner with entities around the world to keep a 24/7 watch on our solar neighbor through telescopes, satellites and other observations in multiple wavelengths.

Burgeoning science also seeks to better understand how solar activity originates. For example, NASA's Parker Solar Probe and ESA's Solar Orbiter both swoop within a close range of the sun to sample the solar wind of particles that stream through the solar system, and to examine solar structures and the sun's atmosphere up close.

Elizabeth Howell is the co-author of "Why Am I Taller?" (ECW Press, 2022; with Canadian astronaut Dave Williams), a book about space medicine. Follow her on Twitter @howellspace. Follow us on Twitter @Spacedotcom or Facebook.

See more

See more

See more

FSU, FAMU students march against Gov. DeSantis' move to dismantle diversity programs

Tarah Jean,Tallahassee Democrat
Thu, February 9, 2023 

Students at Florida State University are taking a stand against Governor Ron DeSantis’s efforts to dismantle diversity, equity and inclusion programs from their campus and other ones across Florida.

Led by Students for a Democratic Society, a political student activist organization, about 50 individuals — which included Florida A&M University students and other community members — gathered Wednesday at 6 p.m. to march from the Legacy Fountain on FSU’s Landis Green to the Westcott Building.

“Even though FSU is a PWI (predominantly white institution), white students are not the only students at FSU,” Isabela Casanoba, a second-year graduate student at FSU pursuing a degree in education, told the Tallahassee Democrat.

“There are plenty of Black students, Asian students, Middle Eastern students and more on campus,” said Casanoba, who is president of the organization. “Just because they are minorities, that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be represented in our curriculum and in our social spaces.”


While marching, the students yelled out chants such as “We won’t go back, we will fight back” and “Money for schools and education, not for racist legislation.”

Related news:

Tucker Carlson says FSU scholarship promotes 'race hatred'; university updates language

More:

FSU faculty say it's 'rubbish' as Christopher Rufo targets FSU 'radical' diversity programs

Delilah Pierre, president of the Tallahassee Community Action Committee, speaks to students and community members gathered at Florida State University on Wednesday, Feb. 8, 2023, to protest Gov. Ron DeSantis’s push to defund and close diversity, equity and inclusion programs on campuses.

While most of the participants of the rally were students, a few faculty members — including FSU's Robert O. Lawton Distinguished Professor Maxine Montgomery — marched in support of the students as well.

Montgomery, who was appointed to chair the FSU President's Task Force on Anti-Racism, Equity and Inclusion by former President John Thrasher in 2020-2021, recorded the protesters from the back of the group as she chimed in with their chants along the way.

Signs were held up high with the phrases "Hands off our schools” and “You can’t erase us.”

DeSantis has called such diversity, equity and inclusion programs "trendy ideology," and made their dismantling a key part of his so-called war on woke.

“I think DeSantis’ intent is to white-wash history, to normalize racism and exclude any former version of realistic Black history, queer history and trans history,” FSU alumna Delilah Pierre said.

She graduated from the university in 2019 with a degree in creative writing and is now the president of the Tallahassee Community Action Committee, an organization that fights for peace, justice and equality.

“If we don’t take a stand now against what DeSantis is doing, we’re going to create an environment in our public colleges and grade schools that totally distorts history,” 24-year-old Pierre said.

DeSantis in the headlines:

DeSantis wants to know how much Florida colleges spend on 'trendy ideology'

More:DeSantis pushes Florida universities to the right, targeting tenure, diversity initiatives

Students and community members gather and march at Florida State University on Wednesday, Feb. 8, 2023, to protest Gov. Ron DeSantis’s push to defund and close diversity, equity and inclusion programs on campuses.

Recent reports show that FSU spends over $2.4 million on DEI programs, with $2.2 million funded by the state. FAMU spends a total of $4.4 million with the state funded portion being $4.1 million.

“We call on FSU to not allow this to go through, and I call on my school to not capitulate,” FAMU student Tim White said from the steps of the Westcott Building.

White — who goes by "Tewa" — is a student on break this semester who will be entering his senior year at FAMU this fall.

“I truly do not want to see this happen to an HBCU (historically Black college or university) here or anywhere else," they added. "We are going to fight it every day that we can."

More:A detailed look at how much FSU, FAMU spend on diversity, equity and inclusion programs

The Students for a Democratic Society plans to continue holding rallies and is also working on mobilizing support from other chapters of the organization across the state.

FSU junior Jason Carles marches at Florida State University on Wednesday, Feb. 8, 2023, to protest Gov. Ron DeSantis’s push to defund and close diversity, equity and inclusion programs on campuses.

A list of demands will also be sent to FSU President Richard McCullough, according to the organization’s Vice President Eric Carson. They include:

Protect all multicultural studies


Increase Black enrollment and professors


Protects trans students and athletes


Listen to students and oppose DeSantis

Contact Tarah Jean at tjean@tallahassee.com or follow her on twitter @tarahjean_.

University fired professor who reported sexual misconduct, Oregon lawsuit says


Street View Image from (August and 2011) © (2011) Google


Madeleine List
Wed, February 8, 2023

A tenured professor fired by his university after he repeatedly brought concerns about sexual misconduct to university leaders was awarded $1 million in a settlement, according to an Oregon lawsuit.

The professor, Daniel Pollack-Pelzner, was fired by Linfield University “without notice” on April 27, 2021 — the day his students were scheduled to submit their final projects, the lawsuit says.

Pollack-Pelzner says in the complaint he was fired for reporting allegations of sexual harassment from colleagues and students at the private university, which enrolls about 1,700 students with campuses in McMinnville and Portland.

In a statement, a university spokesperson said it had agreed to resolve all legal claims with Pollack-Pelzner but denied the allegations.

“The university has made its position clear on the merits of the litigation through filings and submissions to the court,” the statement says. “However, defending against litigation, even when confident in the legal outcome, diverts time and energy from the mission of the institution. We felt it preferable to resolve this situation and move on… Most importantly, this agreement allows Linfield to focus on building and expanding upon its rich educational heritage and creating a welcoming community for all.”
Reporting sexual misconduct

In November 2019, a faculty member told Pollack-Pelzner, who served on the university’s Board of Trustees, that a new trustee had “touched her, asked about her marital status, and proposed that she accompany him off-campus,” during a faculty-trustee event, the complaint says .

That month, another faculty member told Pollack-Pelzner one of her former students said a trustee had inappropriately touched her and made inappropriate comments at a student-trustee event in spring 2019, the complaint says .

Pollack-Pelzner told the university’s vice president about the reports and suggested the Board of Trustees conduct sexual harassment training for trustees, come up with clear guidelines for trustee behavior and have “alternative formats” for social events, the complaint says.

He led a group of faculty and staff members in sending a letter to university leadership requesting diversity and inclusion training for the campus community after hateful and racist graffiti was found in a dorm, the lawsuit says.

Pollack-Pelzner, who is Jewish, also reported anti-Semitic comments from university leaders, the complaint says.

In February 2020, the university president said Linfield would be “destroyed from within” like many ancient civilizations because of internal dissent and “disloyal” people who criticize the institution, according to the complaint. He also said people who criticize Linfield should follow the teachings of Jesus Christ, the complaint says.

During a meeting, a board chair also accused Pollack-Pelzner of having a “secret agenda” and attempting a “power grab,” comments he interpreted as anti-Semitic, according to the lawsuit.

Pollack-Pelzner, who was a tenured professor of English and Shakespeare, learned he was terminated on April 27, 2021, when his university-issued laptop “froze in the middle of a work-related video conference,” the complaint says. When he tried emailing his university email address, he received a bounceback message stating that he was no longer a Linfield employee.

A few hours later, he received an email from the university’s provost saying he had been terminated, according to the complaint.

The university did not pay him the salary or severance he was entitled to, the complaint says.

“(Pollack-Pelzner’s) reports and opposition to unlawful discrimination, sexual harassment, and sexual assault were a substantial factor in Linfield’s decisions to censor, discredit, disparage, and discharge plaintiff without even providing him the predismissal notice and a hearing to which all tenured University faculty are entitled,” the complaint says. .

Pollack-Pelzner’s firing in April 2021 touched off a wave of protest from parents, alumni and a national education organization, according to The Oregonian.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a national civil liberties organization focusing on the rights of students and faculty on college campuses, sent a letter to the university’s president in response to the firing.

“The egregious nature of terminating a faculty critic without process cannot be overstated, nor can the chilling effect on student and faculty expression that will follow Linfield’s reckless conduct,” the letter said, according to The Oregonian.

Pollack-Pelzner signed an agreement for a total settlement amount of $1,037,500 on Jan. 26, according to his lawyers.

Pollack-Pelzner, who is now a visiting scholar at Portland State University, said in a statement that everyone should “be able to work and study without fear of discrimination or harassment.”

“And everyone should be able to report their safety concerns without fear of retaliation,” the statement says. “I’m grateful for the many students, alumni, and colleagues who joined me in demanding change and refused to be silenced when Linfield failed to uphold these essential principles.”

Column: Big oil companies are already reneging on their global warming goals

Michael Hiltzik
Thu, February 9, 2023

The Kern River Oil Field in Bakersfield: Don't expect scenes like this to go away any time soon. (Associated Press)

If there's an enduring truism about corporate promises to do well by doing good, it's that believing them is a mug's game.

Latest case in point: The promise by some of our largest fossil fuel companies that they would be in the forefront of the transition to renewable energy.

In the last few days, two of the companies that made the most grandiose promises, BP and Shell, have backed away from their pledges about investments in renewable sources such as solar and wind.

We want to continue to go for lower and lower and lower carbon, but it has to be profitable.

Shell CEO Wael Sawan

On Tuesday, for example, BP Chief Executive Bernard Looney revealed that the company now expects its oil and gas production in 2030 to fall about 25% below what it was in 2019; previously, the company projected a reduction by 40%.

The company also scaled back its projection of emissions from its oil and gas production to a 20% to 30% reduction from 2019 levels by 2030, down from its earlier projection of a 35% to 40% reduction.

"We need continuing near-term investment into today’s energy system — which depends on oil and gas — to meet today’s demands and to make sure the transition is an orderly one," Looney said in BP's strategy update, published Tuesday.

At Shell, renewables advocates were cheered last month by the promotion of Wael Sawan, director of the company's renewables business, to the CEO post.

Sawan promptly poured cold water on the expectation that Shell would continue to increase its investments in low-carbon fuels, given that the returns on those investments trail those in oil and gas.

Shell's capital spending on low-carbon energy had risen by about 50% to about $3.5 billion in 2022 from its spending in 2021, up from $172 million in 2017 . But the company said in a media call Feb. 2 that there would be no further increase this year.

"Let me be, I think, categorical in this," Sawan told investment analysts Feb. 2. "We cannot justify going for a low return. Our shareholders deserve to see us going after strong returns. If we cannot achieve the double-digit returns in a business, we need to question very hard whether we should continue in that business. Absolutely, we want to continue to go for lower and lower and lower carbon, but it has to be profitable."

BP and Shell were among the companies with the most aggressive renewables projections. Other major oil and gas companies such as Chevron and Exxon Mobil had been much more modest in their expectations.

All four companies, however, had ramped up their rhetorical commitments to the fight against global warming: A study by Japanese researchers published last year found appreciable increases in the use of terms such as "climate change" and "low-carbon energy" in their annual reports from 2009 through 2020.

The reason that the fossil fuel industry is ratcheting back its commitment to renewables is easy to discern: These investments are anathema to Wall Street.

The very day that BP disclosed its slowdown in renewables investments, its stock rocketed higher by 8.35%. BP and Shell have been trading at much lower price-to-earnings multiples — a common indicator of what Wall Street expects from a company's future earnings — than Exxon Mobil and Chevron: 4.17 and 5.18, respectively, for BP and Shell, and 8.6 and 9.31 for Exxon and Chevron.

It's tempting to see the transition from oil and gas to wind, solar and other renewable energy sources as dependent on price — and therefore to assume that the declining cost of the renewable sources will allow them to keep gaining on oil and gas in terms of installed capacity.

For the big energy companies, however, it's profitability, not price, that matters. And their traditional businesses have been spectacularly profitable lately — to the point that it's become a political scandal. That's largely because the companies have been notching record or near-record profits while gasoline prices at the pump have soared, driving the worst inflation in decades.

The industry has been accused of gouging motorists. It's hard to argue with that general conclusion, though it's harder to pinpoint where in the gasoline system the excess profits are being extracted; regular gas prices in California rose to about $6.43 per gallon in October from about $4.68 at the start of 2022, while crude oil prices fell from a peak of nearly $3 per refined gallon to $2.13.

(In a hilariously stupid riposte in October to President Biden's public criticism of oil industry profits and demand that the oil companies return some of their gains to American consumers, Exxon Mobil CEO Darren Woods said, "That’s exactly what we’re doing in the form of our quarterly dividend." Someone might remind Woods that average Americans and Exxon shareholders are not necessarily the same species.)

There's nothing new about the reluctance of incumbent energy producers to move into new technologies. History teaches us that when a major technological transition is underway, big legacy companies end up ceding leadership to small, nimble startups.

That happened at the onset of the personal computer age, when a clutch of brilliant young scientists and engineers employed by Xerox at its Palo Alto Research Center, the legendary PARC, invented the personal computer.

As I've chronicled, Xerox's dependence on its world-beating copier business made it a poor candidate to lead the PC transition. One of the key PARC developers, Larry Tesler, moved to a small company and helped manage the transition from there: Apple. Others went to unheralded new companies such as Atari and Microsoft.

(It's true that giant IBM did jump into the PC business, but did so at first through a disrespected internal skunk works and embraced the new technology largely after its potential became clear.)

The main reason that fossil fuel companies are reluctant to plunge full-hog into the renewables business has much to do with the fundamentally different economic incentives in those two categories of energy production.

Oil and gas is a highly concentrated industry with high barriers to entry — not just everyone can set up as a major integrated fossil fuel company. As a result, the returns on investments are high — 15% or more, in the reckoning of Nick Butler of Kings College, London, a former BP executive.

It's much easier to enter the solar or wind business, which is fragmented and competitive, and where returns are much lower, typically less than 10%.

Moreover, the payback from fossil fuel investments are consistent and long term. From the standpoint of oil and gas producers, fossil fuel power plants are the gift that keeps giving, as their fuel supplies need constantly to be topped off, Swedish researcher Brett Christophers observed in 2021. For wind and solar installations, the heaviest capital investments are upfront, and the ultimate returns are years into the future.

"It’s comparing apples and oranges,” Christophers told Kate Aronoff of the New Republic. As he explained in his paper, ”Promoting renewables requires considerable resources with very long payback periods for projects with no proven track record."

When a big corporation decides where to invest, the key metric is return on investment. Under the circumstances, it shouldn't surprise anyone that Big Oil still sees its traditional products as the key to profits.

Indeed, it should have been clear to anyone paying close attention to Big Oil's pledges on renewables investment that they were always hedged.

For instance, Shell's pledge in its 2019 annual report to reduce the net carbon footprint of its own emissions and those of its customers using its products "by around 20% in 2035 and by around 50% in 2050" carried the qualifier, "assuming society aligns itself with the Paris Agreement’s goals."

(The Paris agreement of 2015 aimed to limit the rise in mean global temperature to less than 2 degrees centigrade, or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit, and preferably less than 1.5 degrees C.)

The realities of corporate finance have kept investments in renewable technologies from rising beyond half the level estimated to be needed to meet the Paris goals, according to the International Energy Agency. Of the $1.9 trillion in global energy investment in 2021, the IEA estimated, only about $367 billion was devoted to renewable power. The rest largely went to fossil energy.

The implication of energy finance is that government investment through public subsidies will remain crucial for years, even decades, into the future. That's what makes the $370 billion in clean energy initiatives in the Biden administration's Inflation Reduction Act, signed in August, so important — they signal that the U.S. government, at least, is on board.

None of this means that the big fossil fuel companies won't eventually increase their investments in wind and solar, or recognize that the oil and gas era will come to an end, so their survival depends on transitioning to new technologies.

At the moment, though, the big companies are still hooked on oil and gas. That's why they've been resistant to shareholder demands that they move away from their traditional businesses, and why even the companies that positioned themselves as farsighted avatars of the energy transition are backing down. No one should have taken their promises at face value to begin with.

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

BP: We’re Making Lots of Money on Oil, so Screw the Climate

Molly Taft
Tue, February 7, 2023

Photo: Kirsty Wigglesworth (AP)

BP is raking in a huge amount of cash these days on oil, so it wants you to ignore all those lofty promises it made about the climate just a few years ago.

On Tuesday, the company became the latest oil major to post some truly jaw-dropping returns from its fourth financial quarter. Thanks in part to the global energy crisis kicked off by the conflict in Ukraine, oil producers have been rolling in dough for the past year, with companies like ExxonMobil and Chevron have posting record profits. BP is no exception. On Tuesday, the company said its 2022 profits were about $27.7 billion, more than twice the profit it posted in 2021. Not bad!

And thanks to that big ol’ number, BP says it’s gonna slow down its progress on the whole climate action thing. In 2020—as the industry was experiencing a crisis where oil prices plunged so low that they briefly went negative—BP said it would reduce carbon emissions from its oil and gas production by 35% to 40% by 2030. Hidden in the financial news released Tuesday, however, is a new target: The company has downgraded its goal to between 20% and 30% over the same time period, allowing it to keep churning out more of that sweet, sweet oil that’s so in demand right now after oil prices hit enormous highs this summer.

“At the end of the day, we’re responding to what society wants,” CEO Bernard Looney told reporters about the changes on Tuesday. In a seeming attempt to counterbalance the bad news, Looney emphasized in a LinkedIn post that the company would be investing an additional $8 billion in initiatives “like bioenergy and EV-charging that can help people and businesses go lower carbon sooner.”

BP has long been at the forefront of oil companies trying on green marketing for size. The climate- and renewables-related goals it rolled out in 2020, announced under the title “From International Oil Company to Integrated Energy Company,” are among some of the most aggressive put forward by any oil and gas company. (That isn’t saying much, given how none of the net-zero promises put forward by any oil majors are actually worth a damn when it comes to the science, but at least BP is trying slightly harder than, say, Exxon.)

This isn’t the first time BP has walked back on green promises. In the early 2000s, the company formerly known as British Petroleum decided to rebrand as Beyond Petroleum, overhauling its logo and investing in a slew of solar and wind projects. The company ended up quietly selling off those renewable assets in order to pay for two pricy oil spills, including the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster. Oop!

Tuesday’s announcement emphasizes the danger of allowing the fox to run the henhouse when it comes to the energy transition. In recent years, sensing a sea change in how society views their products, oil majors have been positioning themselves as a core part of the solution, coining a raft of new terminology to greenwash their efforts and investing heavily in technological solutions to carbon emissions. The science is clear, however: In order to avert climate disaster, the world needs to stop using fossil fuels as quickly as possible. As BP’s announcement clearly illustrates, as long as there’s still money to be made in fossil fuels, oil companies can’t be trusted to do what needs to be done.

And while Looney may be falsely attributing BP’s drive to earn money from oil on what “society wants,” the rent may yet come due for companies like his.

“This is a temporary situation,” Nick Butler, who used to be a senior executive at BP and is now a visiting professor at Kings College, told the BBC. “Oil and gas prices are going down and the windfall these companies are making won’t last.”

Gizmodo

BP vowed to help set the oil and gas industry on a greener path. Many who bought in now feel betrayed



Vivienne Walt
Tue, February 7, 2023

When BP appointed Bernard Looney as CEO exactly three years ago, climate activists believed they might finally have an ally within Big Oil, after decades of deep distrust of the energy industry. Looney—Irish, from a poor farming family—broke the mold of Britain’s century-old company in more ways than one: He vowed to turn BP into a green energy giant, by drastically cutting oil and gas production and plowing billions into renewables. “This is the first oil major to walk the walk,” Mark van Baal, founder of the Amsterdam-based shareholder activist organization Follow This, told Fortune at the time. “If one oil major breaks ranks, and shareholders reward them for it, others will follow.”

That optimism shattered on Tuesday, when BP became the latest oil supermajor to report record-high profits for 2022—while announcing, at the same time, a sharp rollback of its climate targets.

Thanks in part to soaring gas and oil prices over the past year, BP’s underlying profits more than doubled in 2022, to $27.7 billion. (Its exit from Russia, where it had a 19.75% stake in Rosneft, cost the company $24 billion, leaving it with a paper loss after taxes of $2.5 billion.)

Dramatic rollback

Despite the bumper year, however, Looney announced BP would dramatically roll back his key climate promise, which he made in 2020. That year, Looney pledged 40% cut in carbon emissions from BP’s oil and gas production by 2030. He argued that those dramatic shifts were urgent. “Without action, it is a rather bleak future for the world,” he told Fortune in 2020, echoing a central point that environmentalists had made for years.

But on Tuesday, he said that BP’s drop in emissions would likely be a more modest 20% to 30%. “We need continuing near-term investment into today’s energy system,” Looney said, adding that the energy transition has to be “an orderly one.” The company also said it would invest about $1 billion a year in oil and gas production—an apparent about-face from Looney’s earlier statement that the company would steadily reduce its involvement in fossil fuels.

To climate activists, that felt like a knife in the back. “BP’s aim to reduce absolute emissions from their own production was one of the few tangible targets in the entire oil industry,” van Baal told Fortune on Tuesday. “They made enormous profits, and they’re back in their comfort zone,” he says. “They want to hang on to their old business model as long as possible, because it is profitable.”

'Back in their comfort zone'

Van Baal says he will push for far-reaching cuts in fossil-fuel production, in resolutions that Follow This will put forward during Big Oil’s annual shareholder meetings this spring. In a meeting in late 2019, Looney persuaded Van Baal to withdraw a similar resolution, saying he wanted to work with him to roll out climate action within BP, according to Van Baal. Activists believe such resolutions have prompted oil companies to set carbon-emission targets for fear of alienating investors, who increasingly regard climate change as a major risk factor.

BP’s earlier commitments suggested that “the pressure climate-conscious investors were putting on the industry was having an impact,” said Kathy Mulvey, of the Union of Concerned Scientists, an environmental group in Cambridge, Mass. Now, she says, she believes “BP’s climate pledges have been cynical, empty, and opportunistic.”
'Energy trilemma'

Looney argues that the Ukraine war and rising inflation showed how important it was to have a steady flow oil and gas supplies. In a LinkedIn post, he said BP would focus its oil and gas investments on low-cost production. “The world wants and needs energy that’s secure and affordable, as well as lower carbon,” he said, calling it “the energy trilemma.”

Environmentalists said Looney was sugar-coating his rollback of climate commitments. “I’m sorry to say this is a huge disappointment,” Helena Farstad, cofounder and director of London-based climate branding company This is Agency, said in a response on LinkedIn. “BP has demonstrated its lack of leadership.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

Biden continues to push U.S. natural gas exports, angering climate change activists

Competing priorities have resulted in debate over whether federal regulators should allow more exports of natural gas, and whether to approve the construction of terminals for that purpose.

Ben Adler
·Senior Editor
Tue, February 7, 2023 

Since Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine in February of last year and disrupted energy markets, the Biden administration has been eager to ramp up U.S. exports of liquefied natural gas (LNG), in an effort to free Europe from its dependence on Russian gas.

But that undercuts the president’s commitment to reduce the pollution causing climate change and to keep energy prices low for American consumers, according to consumer advocates at organizations such as Public Citizen and leading environmental organizations such as the Sierra Club and Natural Resources Defense Council.

Those competing priorities have resulted in debate over whether federal regulators should allow more exports of natural gas, and whether to approve the construction of terminals for that purpose. Last year, congressional Republicans including Sens. Marco Rubio and Rick Scott of Florida introduced legislation to expedite approval of LNG export terminals.

Environmental and consumer advocacy groups, meanwhile, are asking the Department of Energy (DOE) to do the opposite, and to adopt a more rigorous process for reviewing gas export permit applications. In October, a coalition of consumer watchdogs led by Public Citizen sent a petition to Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm arguing that U.S. gas consumers are being subjected to price shocks due to global supply disruptions, such as skyrocketing prices after Russia invaded Ukraine.

President Biden addresses the COP27 climate summit in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, on Nov. 11, 2022. (Mohamed Abd El Ghany/Reuters)

“If we had zero LNG exports, we would not see variability in gas prices,” Tyson Slocum, director of Public Citizen's energy program, recently told Yahoo News. “But LNG exports introduce global volatility into domestic markets.”

“The Department gives short shrift to climate,” a collection of environmental organizations led by the Sierra Club complained in a companion petition, arguing that increasing gas exports will increase the greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming.

So far, the administration is coming down squarely on the side of encouraging exports.

“With respect to LNG, we know that our liquefied natural gas exports have been a significant help to our allies,” Granholm said, in response to a question from Yahoo News during a Jan. 23 press conference. “We are fortunate that we have an abundance, obviously, of natural gas in this country. Our prices are low. But during times of challenge, we want to help our allies as well.”

Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm at the daily briefing at the White House on Jan. 23. (Susan Walsh/AP)

When burned, gas creates roughly half of the carbon dioxide emissions that coal does. But there are no gas pipelines across the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans, so selling gas to Asia or Europe requires freezing it into a liquid, shipping it across the water, and heating it up to regasify it at its destination. That energy-intensive process is “effectively doubling the climate impact of each unit of energy created from gas transported overseas,” according to a December 2020 study from the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). Add in the leakage of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, at U.S. gas wells and pipelines — which recent studies have shown is widespread and worse than the federal government assumes — and LNG creates almost as much climate pollution as coal, the NRDC found.

Climate activists also warn that spending billions of dollars on fossil fuel infrastructure with a projected multi-decade lifespan locks in dependence on fossil fuels, when Europe and Asia should be focusing on switching to renewable energy. (In the wake of Russia’s invasion, the European Union launched an ambitious effort to increase renewable development.)

“If the LNG export industry expands as projected, it is likely to make it nearly impossible to keep global temperatures from increasing above the 1.5 degrees Celsius threshold for catastrophic climate impacts,” the NRDC concluded in its report.

Spurred by the bounty of domestic production unleashed by hydraulic fracturing, better known as fracking, exports of gas skyrocketed from 1.14 trillion cubic feet in 2010 to 6.65 trillion cubic feet in 2021, when they accounted for 10% of U.S. gas production, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. In the first nine months of 2022, more than 15% of U.S. gas was exported. The U.S. Energy Information Administration projects that LNG exports will increase by 13% this year.

“We want to make sure it’s the cleanest natural gas,” Granholm said at the recent press conference, going on to note the Biden administration’s support for carbon capture and storage, or CCS, which takes carbon dioxide emissions from the smokestack and compresses them underground, as well as its initiatives to reduce methane leakage.

"We are committed to a managed and equitable transition to clean power," a DOE spokesperson wrote in an emailed statement to Yahoo News. "Fossil fuels will be in the energy mix during this transition, which is why DOE is investing in advanced technologies" like CCS.

Climate-conscious Republicans echo that message. “The more you control methane, the more viable the argument is that we should be exporting natural gas,” Rep. John Curtis, R-Utah, who founded the Conservative Climate Caucus, told Yahoo News in a phone interview in November.

A liquefied natural gas tanker makes its way into Cameron Pass near the site of Venture Global's LNG facility near Cameron, La., in April 2022. (The Washington Post via Getty Images)

Historically, most U.S. gas exports went to Asian countries such as China, South Korea and Japan, but last year, chasing sky-high prices in Europe, the amount going to Europe doubled. The DOE is currently considering a few dozen applications to export gas. While Granholm argues that this will help U.S. allies in Europe stand up to Russia, there is no requirement that the gas go there, as opposed to merely the highest bidder. Following a review process created in 1984, the department has approved every application it has ever received, according to Slocum.

Natural gas prices in the United States doubled between January and June of last year, due to increased demand from abroad and a supply crunch caused by the Russia-Ukraine war, though they have since dropped to below their prewar level because Europe reduced its demand through conservation measures, and stored up a large reserve of gas, after unusually warm winter weather limited the need for home heating fuel.

The gas industry disputes the climate movement’s contention that LNG isn’t better for the environment than the alternatives in Europe. The American Petroleum Institute, which represents oil and gas companies, performed an analysis in 2020 that found that if power plants in China, India or Germany switched from burning coal to LNG from the U.S., carbon emissions would be cut in half. (The methodological dispute stems from different assumptions about the carbon footprint of turning gas into LNG, the rate of leakage in Russian gas infrastructure and so on.) Gas also creates less conventional air pollution, like soot and smog, than coal does.

“Last year, 2022, global coal consumption was at an all-time record, so there’s clearly an opportunity to displace more coal with U.S. natural gas and derive substantial environmental and greenhouse gas benefit from that use,” Richard Meyer, vice president of energy markets, analysis, and standards for the American Gas Association, told Yahoo News. “If you take a look at the comparison of greenhouse gas emissions from U.S. LNG, there are benefits [compared] to Russian pipeline gas.”

A small vehicle drives past a network of piping that makes up pieces of a "train" at Cameron LNG export facility in Hackberry, La., in March 2022. (Martha Irvine/AP)

Ground zero for the fight over LNG exports might be the port of Brownsville, Texas, where the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) approved applications to build two LNG export terminals in 2020. Environmental activists sued, arguing that the agency didn’t properly consider the climate change and environmental justice implications of the terminals. In 2021, they won a federal court ruling ordering FERC to review the applications again. That review is ongoing, and a spokesperson for FERC told Yahoo News that the agency could not comment on applications that “are currently pending.”

Local environmental and Indigenous activists have been campaigning against the terminals’ approval for years, and several local legislative bodies in the area, including the Laguna Vista Town Council and the South Padre Island City Council, have unanimously passed resolutions expressing their opposition.

“We want to see Europe get support for clean energy,” Rebekah Hinojosa, a Gulf Coast campaign representative at the Sierra Club, who is based in Brownsville, said. “The amount of time it takes for a LNG facility to be built is years and years. That’s time and resources that could be spent on cleaner alternatives. We want to see Europe be less dependent on fracked gas.”

The effects of fracking on surrounding communities, which can include air and water contamination, are another reason not to increase U.S. gas production, Hinojosa contended. Germany, France, Spain and the United Kingdom have banned fracking, as has New York state.

Storage tanks at the Golden Pass LNG Terminal in Sabine Pass, Texas, in April 2022. (The Washington Post via Getty Images)

Texas LNG, one of the export terminals proposed in Brownsville, told Yahoo News that it reduces carbon emissions by using renewable power to turn gas into LNG.

“We are also focused on using responsibly sourced associated natural gas for liquefaction limiting upstream impact and providing a cleaner alternative to coal and dirtier fuels,” a spokesperson from Glenfarne Energy Transition, the project’s parent company, said in an email. “These steps are taken specifically to protect the public health and environment of our local communities, while providing training and high-paying jobs to a historically disadvantaged area.”

NextDecade, the company that proposed the Rio Grande LNG export terminal in Brownsville, did not respond to a request for comment. On its website, NextDecade boasts that it will capture and store underground more than 5 million tons per year of the carbon dioxide produced by the gas liquefaction process. But less than 7% of the project’s total emissions will be captured. The Sierra Club estimates that Rio Grande LNG could generate as much annual emissions as 44 coal plants or 35 million automobiles.

“It’s kind of like a Band-Aid over a bullet hole,” Emma Guevara, the Sierra Club's Brownsville organizer, told Yahoo News.

While the emerging CCS technology is frequently touted by the fossil fuel industry as a solution for climate pollution, environmentalists worry that it could have unforeseen drawbacks.

“We’re concerned about groundwater pollution, especially with how untested carbon capture and storage is,” Guevara said.

Without a shift from the Biden administration, however, the LNG terminals are likely to be approved, and CCS won’t be untested for much longer.

Erdogan faces crescendo of criticism over quake response


Aftermath of the deadly earthquake in Kahramanmaras

Wed, February 8, 2023 
By Birsen Altayli, Daren Butler and Orhan Coskun

ISTANBUL (Reuters) - Criticism of Turkey's earthquake response mounted on Wednesday, with the political opposition and people in the disaster zone accusing the government of a tardy and inadequate relief effort.

The anger grew louder as President Tayyip Erdogan, facing a tight election in three months time, visited the afflicted area for the first time and acknowledged some problems with the initial response.

Monday's quakes have killed more than 11,000 people across southern Turkey and northwest Syria. They cracked infrastructure and flattened thousands of buildings, causing hardship for millions and leaving many homeless in bitterly cold weather.

"Where is the state? Where have they been for two days? We are begging them. Let us do it, we can get them out," said Sabiha Alinak, near a snow covered collapsed building where her young relatives were trapped in the city of Malatya.

From the outset, Turks have complained of a lack of equipment and support as they waited helplessly next to rubble, lacking the necessary expertise or tools to rescue those trapped - sometimes even as they could hear cries for help.

Kemal Kilicdaroglu, leader of the main opposition party, had earlier in the week said the disaster was a time for unity, not criticism. But on Wednesday he accused the government of failing to cooperate with local authorities and weakening non-governmental organisations that could help.

"I refuse to look at what is happening as above politics and align with the ruling party. This collapse is exactly the result of systematic profiteering politics," he said.

"If there is anyone responsible for this process, it is Erdogan. It is this ruling party that has not prepared the country for an earthquake for 20 years."

Rescue workers have struggled to reach some of the worst-hit areas, held back by destroyed roads, poor weather and lack of resources and heavy equipment, while some areas are without fuel or electricity.

MILITARY RESPONSE

Nasuh Mahruki, founder of a search and rescue group active in response to the 1999 earthquake that killed 17,000, said the army did not act soon enough because Erdogan's government annulled a protocol enabling it to respond without instruction.

"When this was cancelled (their) duties and responsibilities in combating disasters were taken away," he told Reuters.

"In the first seconds (after the 1999 quake), the Turkish Armed Forces started to work and were on the scene with the people within hours," he said, contrasting this with the current situation where the military had to wait for instructions.

"Now it seems the responsibility is with AFAD (Disaster and Emergency Management Authority), but it is not prepared for such a colossal problem," Mahruki added.

Speaking in Kahramanmaras, near the epicentre of the earthquake, Erdogan said: "We had some problems in airports and roads but we are better today".

"I would like to ask you not to give a chance to provocateurs, other than the statements especially from AFAD... Because today is the time for unity," he said.

He did not appear to have had a direct confrontaton with any local people.

A government official, who requested anonymity, said the efforts were hampered by damaged roads, bad weather and being unable to use airports due to damage.

"It seems that we should have been more prepared," the person said.

In the southern city of Antakya, one of the hardest hit, Melek, 64, said she had not seen rescue teams as of late Tuesday. "We haven't seen any food distribution here unlike previous disasters in our country. We survived the earthquake, but we will die here due to hunger or cold."

Selim Temurci, spokesman for the opposition Future Party, said AFAD's efforts were insufficient due to personnel shortages and the vast expanse of destruction.

"They did not have the capacity to conduct search and rescue at all the buildings at once but they only got to certain places in 30 hours," he said, adding those rescued still lacked food and water.

(Additional reporting by Ali Kucukgocmen; Editing by Jonathan Spicer)

Turkey is reportedly blocking access to Twitter following devastating earthquakes

Almost 12,000 people have died in Turkey and Syria since the quakes struck on Monday.

Umit Bektas / reuters

Kris Holt
·Contributing Reporter
Wed, February 8, 2023 

Turkey may be blocking access to Twitter, two days after a pair of catastrophic earthquakes struck the area. Thousands of people are still trapped in buildings in Turkey and Syria, where the death toll is approaching 12,000.

According to Bloomberg, people in Turkey started having trouble accessing Twitter on Wednesday afternoon. Some have resorted to VPNs to use the service. Kemal Kilicdaroglu, the leader of Turkey's main opposition party, has accused the government of blocking Twitter.

It's not clear why the Turkish government might want to prevent access to Twitter amid such devastation. The social media service is still a valuable disaster response tool and users have also been sharing images of the destruction caused by the earthquakes.

Twitter does not have a communications team that can be reached for comment, but on Wenesday afternoon Elon Musk did note through a tweet that Twitter access in Turkey should be "reenabled shortly."



This would not be the first time that Turkey has stopped residents from accessing social media services. It has also done so during cross-border military operations and terror attacks. In 2014, Turkey temporarily banned Twitter. Users were sharing voice recordings and documents that purportedly showed corruption within then-prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's sphere of influence. Erdoğan became Turkey's president later that year and he remains in power. His government has faced criticism for its response to this week's disaster.
Anger over Turkey's temporary Twitter block during quake rescue


Aftermath of the deadly earthquake in Kahramanmaras

Daren Butler and Orhan Coskun
Thu, February 9, 2023 
By Daren Butler and Orhan Coskun

ISTANBUL (Reuters) - Turkey's decision to block access to Twitter for about 12 hours from Wednesday afternoon to early Thursday as people scrambled to find loved ones after devastating earthquakes has compounded public frustration at the pace of relief efforts.

Opposition leaders and social media users criticised the throttling of the platform, which has helped people share information on arriving aid and the location of those still trapped in rubble after the initial tremor on Monday.

President Tayyip Erdogan's government has blocked social media in the past and focused in recent months on fighting what it calls "disinformation", which it said prompted the block on Wednesday.


It restored full access to Twitter early on Thursday as the quake's death toll in Turkey and neighbouring Syria shot past 17,000.

President Tayyip Erdogan's government "lost its mind and... the result is cries for help being heard less. We know everything you're trying to hide," main opposition CHP leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu said after the block was imposed on Wednesday afternoon.

A government official who requested anonymity said the move had temporarily interrupted real calls for help, but that action was taken quickly and the service returned to normal.

"This had to be done because in some accounts there were untrue claims, slander, insults and posts with fraudulent purposes," the official told Reuters, citing efforts to steal money under the pretense of collecting aid.

Turkish officials held talks with Twitter on Wednesday and said they expected cooperation in fighting disinformation during relief work, Deputy Transport Minister Omer Fatih Sayan said.

Erdogan's communications director, Fahrettin Altun, said Twitter cooperated in the meeting and pledged to support Turkey's efforts, and officials look forward to working with it "over the next few days and weeks".

"Disinformation is humanity's common enemy and a grave threat to democracy, social peace, and national security," he said on Twitter on Thursday.

Last October, Turkey's parliament adopted a law under which journalists and social media users could be jailed for up to three years for spreading "disinformation", raising concerns among rights groups and European countries about free speech.

Erdogan's ruling party had said a law was needed to tackle false accusations on social media, and it would not silence opposition. The issue is of growing significance with elections scheduled to be held by the middle of this year.

A Reuters investigation last summer showed how the mainstream media has become a tight chain of command of government-approved headlines, while the smaller independent and opposition media face the brunt of regulatory penalties.

The Twitter block also drew an angry response from opposition DEVA party leader Ali Babacan, a former economy minister and Erdogan ally.

"How can Twitter be blocked on a day when communication is saving lives? What sort of ignorance this," Babacan said late on Wednesday.

The pro-Kurdish HDP party said Twitter had played a crucial role in organizing aid for those affected by the quakes and that blocking social media would only cause more death.

(Writing by Daren Butler; Editing by Jonathan Spicer, Alexandra Hudson)

Several universities to experiment with micro nuclear power

Last Energy's demonstration unit that contains a prototype reactor, is shown Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2023, in Brookshire, Texas. For the company's CEO, Bret Kugelmass, the urgency of the climate crisis means zero-carbon nuclear energy must be scaled up soon. (AP Photo/David J. Phillip)

JENNIFER McDERMOTT
Thu, February 9, 2023 at 6:02 AM MST·6 min read

If your image of nuclear power is giant, cylindrical concrete cooling towers pouring out steam on a site that takes up hundreds of acres of land, soon there will be an alternative: tiny nuclear reactors that produce only one-hundredth the electricity and can even be delivered on a truck.

Small but meaningful amounts of electricity — nearly enough to run a small campus, a hospital or a military complex, for example — will pulse from a new generation of micronuclear reactors. Now, some universities are taking interest.

“What we see is these advanced reactor technologies having a real future in decarbonizing the energy landscape in the U.S. and around the world,” said Caleb Brooks, a nuclear engineering professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

The tiny reactors carry some of the same challenges as large-scale nuclear, such as how to dispose of radioactive waste and how to make sure they are secure. Supporters say those issues can be managed and the benefits outweigh any risks.


Universities are interested in the technology not just to power their buildings but to see how far it can go in replacing the coal and gas-fired energy that causes climate change. The University of Illinois hopes to advance the technology as part of a clean energy future, Brooks said. The school plans to apply for a construction permit for a high-temperature, gas-cooled reactor developed by the Ultra Safe Nuclear Corporation, and aims to start operating it by early 2028. Brooks is the project lead.

Microreactors will be “transformative” because they can be built in factories and hooked up on site in a plug-and-play way, said Jacopo Buongiorno, professor of nuclear science and engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Buongiorno studies the role of nuclear energy in a clean energy world.

“That’s what we want to see, nuclear energy on demand as a product, not as a big mega project,” he said.

Both Buongiorno and Marc Nichol, senior director for new reactors at the Nuclear Energy Institute, view the interest by schools as the start of a trend.

Last year, Penn State University signed a memorandum of understanding with Westinghouse to collaborate on microreactor technology. Mike Shaqqo, the company’s senior vice president for advanced reactor programs, said universities are going to be “one of our key early adopters for this technology.”

Penn State wants to prove the technology so that Appalachian industries, such as steel and cement manufacturers, may be able to use it, said Professor Jean Paul Allain, head of the nuclear engineering department. Those two industries tend to burn dirty fuels and have very high emissions. Using a microreactor also could be one of several options to help the university use less natural gas and achieve its long-term carbon emissions goals, he said.

“I do feel that microreactors can be a game-changer and revolutionize the way we think about energy,” Allain said.

For Allain, microreactors can complement renewable energy by providing a large amount of power without taking up much land. A 10-megawatt microreactor could go on less than an acre, whereas windmills or a solar farm would need far more space to produce 10 megawatts, he added. The goal is to have one at Penn State by the end of the decade.

Purdue University in Indiana is working with Duke Energy on the feasibility of using advanced nuclear energy to meet its long-term energy needs.

Nuclear reactors that are used for research are nothing new on campus. About two dozen U.S. universities have them. But using them as an energy source is new.

Back at the University of Illinois, Brooks explains the microreactor would generate heat to make steam. While the excess heat from burning coal and gas to make electricity is often wasted, Brooks sees the steam production from the nuclear microreactor as a plus, because it's a carbon-free way to deliver steam through the campus district heating system to radiators in buildings, a common heating method for large facilities in the Midwest and Northeast. The campus has hundreds of buildings.

The 10-megawatt microreactor wouldn't meet all of the demand, but it would serve to demonstrate the technology, as other communities and campuses look to transition away from fossil fuels, Brooks said.

One company that is building microreactors that the public can get a look at today is Last Energy, based in Washington, D.C. It built a model reactor in Brookshire, Texas that's housed in an edgy cube covered in reflective metal.

Now it's taking that apart to test how to transport the unit. A caravan of trucks is taking it to Austin, where company founder Bret Kugelmass is scheduled to speak at the South by Southwest conference and festival.

Kugelmass, a technology entrepreneur and mechanical engineer, is talking with some universities, but his primary focus is on industrial customers. He's working with licensing authorities in the United Kingdom, Poland and Romania to try to get his first reactor running in Europe in 2025.

The urgency of the climate crisis means zero-carbon nuclear energy must be scaled up soon, he said.

“It has to be a small, manufactured product as opposed to a large, bespoke construction project,” he said.

Traditional nuclear power costs billions of dollars. An example is two additional reactors at a plant in Georgia that will end up costing more than $30 billion.

The total cost of Last Energy’s microreactor, including module fabrication, assembly and site prep work, is under $100 million, the company says.

Westinghouse, which has been a mainstay of the nuclear industry for over 70 years, is developing its “eVinci” microreactor, Shaqqo said, and is aiming to get the technology licensed by 2027.

The Department of Defense is working on a microreactor too. Project Pele is a DOD prototype mobile nuclear reactor under design at the Idaho National Laboratory.

Abilene Christian University in Texas is leading a group of three other universities with the company Natura Resources to design and build a research microreactor cooled by molten salt to allow for high temperature operations at low pressure, in part to help train the next generation nuclear workforce.

But not everyone shares the enthusiasm. Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists, called it “completely unjustified.”

Microreactors in general will require much more uranium to be mined and enriched per unit of electricity generated than conventional reactors do, he said. He said he also expects fuel costs to be substantially higher and that more depleted uranium waste could be generated compared to conventional reactors.

“I think those who are hoping that microreactors are going to be the silver bullet for solving the climate change crisis are simply betting on the wrong horse,” he said.

Lyman also said he fears microreactors could be targeted for a terrorist attack, and some designs would use fuels that could be attractive to terrorists seeking to build crude nuclear weapons. The UCS does not oppose using nuclear power, but wants to make sure it’s safe.

The United States does not have a national storage facility for storing spent nuclear fuel and it’s piling up. Microreactors would only compound the problem and spread the radioactive waste around, Lyman said.

A 2022 Stanford-led study found that smaller modular reactors — the next size up from micro — will generate more waste than conventional reactors. Lead author Lindsay Krall said this week that the design of microreactors would make them subject to the same issue.

Kugelmass sees only promise. Nuclear, he said, has been “totally misunderstood and under leveraged.” It will be “the key pillar of our energy transformation moving forward.”

 

SOCIALISM FOR THE RICH  

Des Moines Public Schools may close buildings, cut staff to balance future budgets


Samantha Hernandez, Des Moines Register
Wed, February 8, 2023

Des Moines Public Schools officials could close buildings as part of balancing next year's budget. They're also exploring the potential for staff cuts.

That's what officials said Tuesday night during a Des Moines School Board discussion on the 2023-24 school year budget. They are beginning their planning on a budget amid new legislation that uses taxpayer money to help send students to private schools and a 3% state funding increase that lags behind the 6.5% annual inflation rate at the end of 2022.

Closing yet-to-be-identified buildings and moving expenses to nongeneral fund accounts, as well as making other cuts, could save an estimated $1 million, Interim Superintendent Matt Smith and Chief Financial Officer Shashank Aurora told board members.

More:What does Iowa's $107M funding increase really mean for its public schools? What we found:

“We're looking on both for FY '24 and, of course, beyond, the elimination of some facilities and the consolidation of other facilities," Smith said during the meeting. "And, so, there's more to come on that and our budget season, but there is some consolidation that will be taking place."

Officials are considering closing some athletic and/or extracurricular facilities around the district, Aurora told the Des Moines Register Wednesday. A final decision on which facilities might close has not been made.

An outside company is conducting a district-wide demographic study the board will use to decide if district boundaries need to be redrawn or if buildings will be closed, he said.

“There's also the consolidation of some underutilized facilities,” Smith said Tuesday. “… And so, we're looking on both for FY '24 and, of course, beyond the elimination of some facilities and the consolidation of other facilities.”

Closures could be considered for the 2024-25 school year budget as well, Smith said.

The district must cut about $9.8 million from next year's budget, Aurora said. The total of the proposed 2023-24 budget will not be available until mid-March.

This is not the first time officials have discussed closing buildings as a cost-saving measure. During 2022-23 budget discussions, Aurora told the board the district might have to consider closing buildings.

Staffing and health care cuts also possible

Additional proposed cuts include changes to the employee health care plan and staffing.

The health care plan change would save the district an estimated $750,000, the administration said. Under the proposal, employees no longer would have a $100 copay on specialty medicines like cancer medication or EpiPens, the administration said.

Proposed staffing reductions could save an estimated $9 million and include cuts to 2% of the teaching staff because of declining enrollment, 5% of support staff and 5% of central office staff, they say.

"One of the top priorities for (Des Moines Education Association) is to keep cuts as far away from classroom individuals directly engaged with students as possible," said Josh Brown, the teachers union president, in an interview Wednesday. "We are surveying our members currently to get their priorities in the budget to be able to amplify and lift up their voices in the process."

Heading into the current 2022-23 school year, district officials made $9.4 million in cuts because of declining enrollment. Those reductions included eliminating 12 full-time positions, canceling a conference and using money earmarked for other costs to cover general spending.

The effects of the new 'school choice' law

The newly passed "school choice" law will eventually put $7,635 into an account for every student who wants to attend private school. The law was a top priority for Gov. Kim Reynolds over the last three legislative sessions.

Central Campus is seen on April 29, 2021 in Des Moines.

The new law also gives public school districts about $1,205 in additional money for each private school student who lives within district boundaries. But those districts would also lose about $7,600 per student for those who choose to leave for a private school through an education savings account.

Districts will only get the supplemental funds for students who apply for and receive an ESA, Aurora said.

Des Moines Public Schools, which has an enrollment of about 31,000, has lost 2,500 students over the last three years for reasons including open enrollment and families relocating, Smith said.

"This actually started prior to the pandemic," he said. "The pandemic exacerbated and amplified that loss of enrollment."

Related:How far will Iowa's $7,600 education savings accounts go for covering private school costs?

The district lost 500 students last school year following the passage of several new laws, including the end of the open enrollment deadline, Aurora said in the same interview. This school year, the district has lost 250 students.

The budget will likely not be approved until April. District officials plan to hold community budget information meetings in late February and early March.

Samantha Hernandez covers education for the Register. Reach her at (515) 851-0982 or svhernandez@gannett.com. Follow her on Twitter at @svhernandez or Facebook at facebook.com/svhernandezreporter.

This article originally appeared on Des Moines Register: Des Moines Public Schools may close buildings to balance future budgets