Broad Public Support for Coronavirus Aid Package; Just a Third Say It Spends Too Much

Pew Research

More Americans say the Biden administration made a ‘good faith’ effort working with opposition than say the same of GOP leaders

How we did this


As the House of Representatives prepares to give final approval to the Biden administration’s $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief package, a sizable majority of U.S. adults (70%) say they favor the legislation. Only about three-in-ten (28%) oppose the bill, which provides economic aid to businesses, individuals and state and local governments.

While congressional votes on the legislation have been deeply divided along partisan lines, 41% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents support the measure. The bill draws overwhelming support from Democrats and Democratic leaners (94% favor).


In assessing the proposed spending in the aid package, 41% of Americans view it as about right, while another 25% say it spends too little; only a third of Americans say the legislation spends too much money. Republicans are far more likely than Democrats to view the spending in the bill as excessive (61% of Republicans vs. 11% of Democrats).

The new national survey by Pew Research Center, conducted on the Center’s nationally representative American Trends Panel March 1-7, 2021, among 12,055 adults, finds that a majority of the public (57%) says the Biden administration made a good faith effort working with Republican congressional leaders on the coronavirus aid package.

By comparison, 42% say GOP leaders made a good faith effort to work with the White House on the pandemic relief bill, with a 55% majority saying they did not work in good faith.
Across demographic groups, large shares of the public support the federal aid package


While most Americans favor the coronavirus aid package, there are demographic differences in the levels of support.

Three-quarters of women say they favor the aid package, while a smaller majority of men (66%) say the same.

While overwhelming majorities of Black (91%), Hispanic (80%) and Asian American adults (76%) say they favor the economic package, that compares with a smaller majority of White adults (63%).

There are also substantial differences in views of the economic stimulus package by household income. About eight-in-ten Americans in lower-income households (82%) favor the bill, compared with two-thirds of middle-income and 60% of upper-income Americans.

Although a 57% majority of Republicans say they oppose the proposed stimulus bill, there is a substantial ideological divide within the GOP: Roughly seven-in-ten conservative Republicans (69%) say they oppose the economic package, while the balance of opinion is reversed among moderate and liberal Republicans, 61% of whom say they favor the aid bill.

By contrast, there is near-universal support for the economic bill among Democrats: More than nine-in-ten (94%) say they favor the COVID-19 economic aid package.


Among Republicans, there are wide differences in support for the economic package by household income. A 63% majority of lower-income Republicans and Republican leaners (who make up 25% of all Republicans and Republican leaners) say they favor the proposed economic package. By comparison, 37% of Republicans in middle-income households (50% of Republicans) and just 25% of upper-income Republicans (21% of all Republicans) favor the bill.

There are no substantial differences by income among Democrats.

About four-in-ten Americans (41%) say the proposed spending on the bill is about right, while a third say the proposed spending in the bill is too much and a quarter say the amount of allocated money is too little.


While about four-in-ten of those in all income groups say the spending in the aid package is “about right,” Americans with lower incomes are more likely than others to say the amount of spending in the COVID-19 economic package is “too little” (and less likely to say it is “too much”).

About four-in-ten lower-income Americans (37%) say the bill spends too little, compared with 22% of middle-income and 13% of upper-income Americans. Conversely, 46% of upper-income Americans say the bill spends too much; just 20% of lower-income Americans say this.

Partisans also differ in these views: A majority of Democrats (56%) say spending for the bill is about right, with a third saying it is too little and just 11% saying it is too much. In contrast, most Republicans (61%) say the bill is spending too much.

Reflecting the income pattern among all Americans, within both partisan groups, those with lower incomes are more likely than those with higher incomes to say the proposed spending on the economic bill is not enough.

For example, while more than a quarter of lower-income Republicans (27%) say the proposed spending in the aid package is too little, just 11% of middle-income and 6% of upper-income Republicans say the same. Fully 81% of upper-income Republicans say the proposed spending in the economic aid package is too much, a view held by 42% of lower income Republicans.

Similarly, lower-income Democrats (42%) are more than twice as likely as upper-income Democrats (20%) to say that spending is too little. Still, half or more Democrats across income levels say the level of spending is about right.

CONTINUE READING

Most Americans support $1.9 trillion COVID-19 aid package; just a third say it spends too much | Pew Research Center

1/3 IS THE GOP BASE

CRIMINAL CAPITALI$M 

'It definitely stinks': Lawmaker demands investigation of huge stock buy just before DeJoy announced USPS vehicle contract

Jake Johnson, Common Dreams
March 09, 2021

Louis DeJoy (YouTube/screen grab)

A Democratic congressman is demanding that the Securities and Exchange Commission investigate a shady $54 million purchase of Oshkosh Corporation stock just hours before scandal-ridden Postmaster General Louis DeJoy announced the decision to award that company with a lucrative 10-year contract to produce a new, largely gasoline-powered fleet of U.S. Postal Service delivery trucks.

"This contract was awarded to Oshkosh Corporation and is worth up to $6 billion," Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio) wrote in a letter to Acting SEC Chair Allison Herren Lee on Monday. "I write to pass along reports of what might be unusual trading of Oshkosh stock that took place less than 24 hours before Postmaster General Louis DeJoy publicly announced the contract decision in front of a House panel on February 23rd."

"It definitely stinks and needs to be looked into at the highest levels. If that is not suspicious, I don't know what is. Somebody clearly knew something." 

—Rep. Tim Ryan

"Specifically, an over $54 million purchase of OSK, made 20 hours before Mr. DeJoy's announcement, was brought to my attention on social media and in news reports," Ryan continued. "Additionally, it is my understanding that the OSK stock rose significantly prior to the announcement. Given the gravity and serious implications of this contract, I am writing to request that the Securities and Exchange Commission look into this issue as soon as possible."

Ryan's letter comes after he joined two fellow Ohio Democrats—Rep. Marcy Kaptur and Sen. Sherrod Brown—in urging President Joe Biden to halt the Oshkosh contract over concerns about "inappropriate political influence in the process."

The Postal Service, under the leadership of DeJoy and Trump-appointed governors, selected Oshkosh for the contract over Workhorse, a truck-maker that had bid to replace the Postal Service's current delivery vehicles with an all-electric fleet.

As Bloomberg reported, Workhorse had initially "been viewed as the favorite" to win the contract, "especially after President Joe Biden ordered the government to utilize emissions-free vehicles. But Oshkosh won the bid last month with a fleet that will be mostly gasoline-powered."

"It definitely stinks and needs to be looked into at the highest levels," Ryan said of the contract, and the trading that preceded it, in an interview with Bloomberg. "If that is not suspicious, I don't know what is. Somebody clearly knew something."

In a letter last week, Kaptur, Brown, and Ryan said they were "troubled" that the Postal Service "awarded an initial contract to provide up to 165,000 new postal vehicles over the next decade without any commitment to making these vehicles either hybrid or 100% electric."

"This contract is not only an investment in America workers and our domestic manufacturing sector, but it is an opportunity for our nation to regain its role as a leader in clean technology manufacturing," the lawmakers wrote. "This contract will have consequences for decades to come and, as such, we have serious concerns it could be a wasted opportunity to address the climate crisis and the reindustrialization of our manufacturing sector."

"Postmaster General Louis DeJoy's tenure has been a disaster for the American people and the USPS's dedicated workforce," the lawmakers continued. "From ill-advised policies that have delayed the mail and life-saving medicines to seniors and veterans, to an utter disregard for the agency he leads. This week's announcement further calls into question his judgment, his ability to effectively run the USPS, and his short-sightedness at this agency that plays a critical role in our nation.

Congressman asks SEC to investigate $54 million trade in Oshkosh just hours before announcement of USPS fleet-contract

mfox@businessinsider.com (Matthew Fox) 14 hrs ago

© USPS USPS NGDV. USPS

Congressman Tim Ryan has asked the SEC to investigate a $54 million trade in Oshkosh stock that took place just hours before the USPS awarded a contract to the firm.

The USPS has been working to upgrade its fleet of vehicles and Workhorse Group was viewed as the favorite.

"It definitely stinks and needs to be looked into at the highest levels," Ryan said in an interview.

The US Postal Service's decision to award a contract worth as much as $6 billion to Oshkosh to upgrade its delivery fleet is being met with scrutiny from Democrats, including Ohio Congressman Tim Ryan.

In a letter on Monday, Ryan asked the Securities & Exchange Commission to investigate a $54 million trade in shares of Oshkosh that was made just hours before the USPS officially announced its decision to award the contract to them.

"I write to pass along reports of what might be unusual trading of Oshkosh stock that took place less than 24 hours before Postmaster General Louis DeJoy publicly announced the contract decision in front of a House panel on February 23rd," Ryan wrote.

"Specifically, an over $54 million purchase of OSK [was] made 20 hours before Mr. DeJoy's announcement," Ryan added.

The announcement by DeJoy sent shares of Workhorse Group, which was viewed as the favorite to win the contract, plunging by more than 50%. Shares of Oshkosh briefly surged following the announcement, but those gains have since evaporated.

"It definitely stinks and needs to be looked into at the highest levels," Ryan said in an interview with Bloomberg.

Part of the pushback on the Oshkosh contract by Democrats is based on the fact that Workhorse Group would have delivered an all-electric fleet of vehicles to the USPS. Instead, the awarded Oshkosh contract will replace just a small portion of the fleet with electric vehicles.

"I am writing to request that the Securities and Exchange Commission look into this issue as soon as possible," Ryan concluded in his letter.

On Monday, a group of Democrats in the House of Representative introduced legislation that could give Workhorse another shot at selling electric vehicles to the USPS. Workhorse jumped nearly 30% in Monday trades following the development.

Workhorse owns a 10% stake in Lordstown Motors, which is based in Congressman Tim Ryan's Ohio district.

Far from White House, Caribbean refinery to test Biden's promises on poverty and pollution


“They made a lot of money off the people of the Virgin Islands and when it got difficult, they shut the plant down,” Ritter said. “We felt used.”

By Laura Sanicola

(Reuters) - Earlier this month, Loren Hughes, a longtime resident of the U.S. Virgin Islands, noticed specks of an oily substance covering his home, as well as those owned by his neighbors.


FILE PHOTO: Installations of the Limetree Bay petroleum refinery are seen in St Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands June 28, 2017 when they were owned by Hovensa. REUTERS/Alvin Baez

For Hughes, 46, it brought back memories of the last time St. Croix’s long-idled refinery was operating, roughly a decade earlier. The refinery restarted last month, bringing back hundreds of jobs - but for nearby residents, they say it also brought difficulty breathing, headaches and watery eyes.

“Sometimes it’s like sulfur or rotten eggs. The other smells are unexplainable,” Hughes said. (H2SO4 HYDROGEN SULPHIDE HIGHLY TOXIC)

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency wants the refinery’s owners, Limetree Bay Ventures, to increase its monitoring of air quality due to emissions affecting the nearby neighborhoods, but the owners have so far balked.

St. Croix is a long way from the U.S. mainland. But the battle over the refinery’s pollution on this Caribbean island and tourist resort is one of the first tests of how the Biden administration will prioritize environmental justice.

As the United States has become the world’s largest fossil fuel producer, opponents have grown more vocal about how many projects, particularly in the petrochemical and refining industries, are situated near low-income areas with large minority populations.

The Biden administration has vowed to make sure new energy projects do not unfairly harm those communities, such as the ones living near the refinery. About 90 million Americans live within 30 miles (50 km) of at least one refinery, according to environmental group Earthjustice.

“This situation offers the first opportunity for the Biden-Harris administration to stand up for an environmental justice community, and take a strong public health and climate chance stance concerning fossil fuels,” said John Walke, senior attorney and director of clean air programs with the Natural Resources Defense Council

After a decade idle, the Limetree Bay refinery restarted this year with plans to process up to 200,000 barrels of oil a day into gasoline and other fuels. Limetree Bay Ventures also received strict conditions from the U.S. EPA, which told the company that it had to add enhanced air quality monitoring.

Limetree Bay, backed by private equity firms EIG and Arclight Capital, is appealing that directive, saying the monitors are not necessary and their operating cost is not Limetree’s responsibility.

A Reuters examination of publicly available EPA data shows the refinery is also currently not monitoring sulfur dioxide levels near the plant, as required. Limetree declined several requests for comment on this issue.

A spokesperson for EIG representing the refinery told Reuters it is committed to excellent environmental performance and considers it fundamental to the company’s success. Arclight did not respond to requests for comment.

St. Croix residents are torn between dealing with the effects of pollution and the benefits of high-paying jobs that offset the loss of tourism dollars amid the coronavirus pandemic.

“When you are talking about people who are poor, they’re not going to criticize the refinery that gives them jobs,” said Virginia Clairmont, a community activist who meets with company representatives quarterly.

A 2020 study by researchers at University of Texas Medical Branch concluded that living within 30 miles of an oil refinery was associated with increased risk of multiple cancer types.

A DECADE-LONG SAGA

The permit Limetree Bay Ventures is fighting was issued during the Trump administration, but it is now up to the Biden administration to enforce it - as it considers even stricter controls.

The refinery, formerly known as Hovensa, produced more than 500,000 barrels of product per day before joint owners Hess and Venezuela’s state-run oil company shut it down in 2012 following violations of the U.S. Clean Air Act. The company cited the global economic slowdown and competition with new refineries in emerging markets.

As it planned to reopen, Limetree in 2018 filed for a permit allowing the company to expand and construct additional units without being deemed a new source of pollution, which would require stricter pollution controls. Trump’s EPA granted the permit, as long as emissions were kept under “plantwide applicability limit.”

In a 2019 report here on Limetree, the EPA said it is difficult to conclude that Limetree Bay's emissions would not hurt nearby residents' health and quality of life. It later required Limetree Bay Ventures to add five air monitors in exchange for the permit.

Limetree Bay has appealed that ruling with the EPA’s Environmental Appeals Board (EAB), a little-known independent U.S. tribunal comprised of four judges that rule on such disputes.

In its appeal, Limetree said the EPA requirements are linked to environmental justice concerns that are unrelated to operating within the pollution limits of the permit.

It is unclear when the EPA’s appeals board will rule on the permit dispute. The Biden-run EPA could withdraw the permit, and it is also reviewing whether the refinery is a new source of pollution that requires stricter air pollution controls.

The White House declined to comment.

If the EAB sides against Limetree, the company has the right to appeal to a federal court. The EPA cannot appeal EAB rulings.

(GRAPHIC - Limetree Bay Refinery Air Monitoring: )

‘QUALITY JOBS’

The restart has created 400 full-time jobs, 80% of which must go to island residents, who mainly rely on tourism for employment

“In these difficult economic times, I am very pleased that the refinery is creating hundreds of well-paying, quality jobs for USVI workers,” St. Croix Governor Albert Bryan Jr. said in January.

Officials estimate the refinery could bring in $7 million in tax revenue annually to the cash-strapped island of 105,000 people. The U.S. territory has a $4 billion unfunded pension liability that is roughly equal to the island’s entire gross domestic product, according to Austin Nibbs, administrator of USVI Government Employees’ Retirement System (GERS).

The refinery should pay the costs of air monitoring, said John Willard, 69, a retired St. Croix school principal with a government pension. “It’s their duty and responsibility to make sure the communities are functioning in remain as healthy as possible and as clean as possible for air,” he said.

Environmental groups, including the St. Croix Environmental Association, are challenging the permit, saying the permit issued by the Trump-era EPA gives Limetree too much leeway to pollute.

An EIG spokesman said the 2020 permit will “give Limetree the flexibility to explore more projects at the refinery that could lead to more local jobs and investment.”

Many residents agree the jobs are needed, but the memory of previous owners remains fresh. Jelani Ritter, who supports the refinery restart, recalls how previous owners filed for bankruptcy, avoiding the U.S. Department of Justice’s order to pay $700 million for pollution controls in 2011 after a series of incidents sickened residents.

“They made a lot of money off the people of the Virgin Islands and when it got difficult, they shut the plant down,” Ritter said. “We felt used.”

(This story has been refiled to restore dropped word ‘justice’ to quote in paragraph eight)


Reporting by Laura Sanicola in New York; Additional reporting by Gary McWilliams in Houston; Editing by David Gaffen and Lisa Shumaker

 THE LATEST IN OIL SANDS NEWS: 

Sen. Ed Markey and Rep. Earl Blumenauer introduced legislation to close a loophole allowing oil sands crude to be exempt from taxes used to fund oil spill clean-ups. The bill would add oil derived from oil sands and oil shale to the definition of crude oil, making it eligible for taxation under the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, according to a release from Blumenauer's office. The legislation is supported by a number of environmental groups.

 Read the bill text here.

Hundreds of activist groups also urged the Biden administration on Monday to revoke permits enabling the Line 3 pipeline to go through Minnesota, contending it would be a threat to water, Indigenous rights and the local environment.

Biden admin backs Murkowski's road - POLITICO

CRIMINAL CAPITALI$M WHY VACCINES ARE LATE

Joe Biden cancels trip to Baltimore vaccine manufacturer Emergent after report exposed company's 'undercutting' tactics that put US stockpile in jeopardy

President Biden canceled a Wednesday trip to Baltimore to visit vaccine facility
Cancellation came after report on the company charged its practices put the Strategic National Stockpile in jeopardy during the COVID pandemic

Biden was scheduled to visit Emergent Bio Solutions with the CEOs of Johnson & Johnson and Merck to talk about their merger to make COVID vaccine

But now that meeting will happen at the White House

The New York Times reported on Saturday the government spent half of the stockpile's budget on Emergence's anthrax vaccine

Those purchases left it short of cash to buy PPE, masks and ventilators

By EMILY GOODIN, SENIOR U.S. POLITICAL REPORTER FOR DAILYMAIL.COM

PUBLISHED: 9 March 2021

President Joe Biden canceled a Wednesday trip to Baltimore to visit a vaccine manufacturer after a scathing report on the company charged its practices put the Strategic National Stockpile in jeopardy during the COVID pandemic.

Biden was scheduled to visit Emergent Bio Solutions with the CEOs of Johnson & Johnson and Merck to talk about their historic partnership to produce more COVID-19 vaccines. The White House announced the visit on Friday.

But on Monday, the White House said the meeting between the president and the CEOs would take place at the White House instead.

'We just felt it was a more appropriate place to have the meeting,' press secretary Jen Psaki said Monday at her daily briefing of the change.

President Joe Biden canceled a Wednesday trip to Baltimore to visit a vaccine manufacturer after a scathing report on the company

On Saturday, The New York Times reported that last year the government paid Emergent $626 million for products, including vaccines, to combat a terrorist attack using anthrax.

Emergent is a Maryland-based company that manufacturers vaccines, including COVID vaccines for AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson.

Throughout most of the last decade, the U.S. government spent nearly half of the stockpile's half-billion-dollar annual budget on Emergent's anthrax vaccines, The Times found.

The stockpile has been Emergence's most reliable customer over the years for its anthrax vaccines.

But those anthrax purchases left the government with less money to buy supplies - including personal protective gear, N95 face masks and ventilators - during the COVID pandemic.

'The administration is going to undertake a comprehensive review and audit of the National Stockpile,' Psaki said.


Emergent is a Maryland-based company that manufacturers vaccines, including COVID vaccines for AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson - Biden was to visit it with the CEOs of Johnson and Johnson and Merck

The New York Times reported on Saturday the government spent half of the stockpile's budget on Emergence's anthrax vaccine leaving it short of cash when it came to buying supplies to combat COVID-19

The stockpile kept enough anthrax vaccines to cover 10 million people and the vaccines need to be replaced every two years as they expire. But The Times investigation found Emergent corned the anthrax market by undercutting competition, hiring former federal officials for its board and having a large lobbying budget.

'You can't protect people from anthrax for less than the cost of a latte,' Nina DeLorenzo, a senior vice president of Emergent, told The Times.

She also defended the company's focus on the government as its main customer pointing out the commercial market is too small to sustain the market and businesses need the government contracts to stay in business.

'The capabilities must be maintained, or they are in danger of being lost, leaving the country vulnerable to threats,' she said. 'When almost no one else would invest in preparing to protect the American public from grave threats, Emergent did, and the country is better prepared today because of i

CRIMINAL CAPITALI$M

Trader gets painted stones instead of $36m of copper

A commodities trader was given painted stones instead of $36m (£26m) of copper from a Turkish supplier in a fraudulent deal last summer.

Geneva-based Mercuria Energy Group says it's been the victim of cargo fraud following its purchase of 10,000 tons of copper blister.

When the cargoes started arriving in China, it found containers full of painted stones instead.

The bizarre case happened despite security and inspection controls.

Last year, Mercuria agreed to buy the copper blister, an impure form of the metal, for delivery to China. About 6,000 tonnes was loaded for shipment in more than 300 containers on eight vessels.

But before its journey from a port near Istanbul, the copper was switched with paving stones, spray-painted to resemble the semi-refined metal.

Mercuria, one of the five-biggest oil traders in the world, is seeking redress in Turkish and UK courts against the copper supplier Bietsan Bakir.

Turkish police have taken a number people into custody in relation to the faux-copper scheme.

Watch the moment Mark Telling finds out he's been a victim of fraud

"Suspects have been taken under custody who are thought to be involved in the various parts of this organised crime against Mercuria," the company said in a statement while thanking the Istanbul Financial Crimes Department.

Seals broken

It appears the copper was initially loaded into the first shipment of containers, before being surveyed by an inspection company. Seals used to prevent fraud were fixed to the containers.

But the containers were opened and the copper replaced with paving stones, Istanbul law firm KYB told media. The fraudsters switched between fake and real container seals to avoid detection.

With the vessels at sea, Mercuria paid $36m over five installments.

The fraud wasn't discovered until the ships began arriving in the Chinese port of Lianyungang later that month.

"There has been a criminal investigation petition by the buyer against the seller and two intermediaries," Turkish police said in a statement. "It's been determined that the incident is the outcome of fraud perpetrated in an organised manner."

In cases of non-delivery a trader could make a claim against a cargo's insurance policy. But Mercuria found that just one out of seven contracts used by the Turkish company to insure the cargo was real. The rest had been forged.

Bietsan Bakir, the Turkish firm which sold Mercuria the copper, did not respond to requests for comment when contacted by Reuters. More hearings on the case are expected this week.

Winchcombe meteorite: Cotswold town reacts to space rock discovery

Imagine hearing a thud and then discovering outside your home the most valuable space rock ever to fall in the UK.

Well, that's what happened to Rob and Cathryn Wilcock, and their daughter Hannah.

They, and the other residents of Winchcombe in Gloucestershire, react to being at the centre of a major scientific discovery.

A fireball, a driveway and a priceless meteorite
Jonathan Amos
Science correspondent
@BBCAmoson Twitter

Hannah, Rob and Cathryn are celebrating an extraordinary find

"We're still pinching ourselves - to believe that this actually happened on our drive!"

Rob Wilcock, his wife Cathryn and daughter Hannah are astounded to find themselves at the centre of a major scientific discovery.

It was their property in Winchcombe, Gloucestershire, that was hit by the most valuable space rock ever to fall on the UK.

The meteorite has had British scientists in raptures of joy.

It's a carbonaceous chondrite - a dark stony material that retains unaltered chemistry from the formation of our Solar System 4.6 billion years ago, and, as such, could give us fresh insights on how the planets came into being.

The first thing the Wilcock family knew about it was when they heard a dull thud outside their house on the night of Sunday 28 February.

Winchcombe meteorite is first UK find in 30 years

"When I heard it drop, I stood up and looked out the window to see what was there," recalled Hannah. "But because it was dark I couldn't see anything.

"It was only the next morning when we went out that we saw it on the drive - a bit like a kind of splatter. And in all honesty, my original thought was - has someone been driving around the Cotswolds lobbing lumps of coal into people's gardens?" she told BBC News.

"Either that or someone had upturned a barbecue tray," chimed in Cathryn.

Scientists knew fragments of a meteorite must be in the Gloucestershire area. Their cameras had recorded the rock coming through the atmosphere that Sunday night, creating a huge fireball in the process.

media caption"It blows your mind": The people of Winchcombe react to the meteorite discovery

Imagery from multiple angles allowed researchers to narrow the drop zone, and when they went on the media to make an appeal on the Monday, they hoped one or two people might come forward with an interesting find.

In fact, they were inundated with pictures. Most had nothing to do with meteorites, but when Open University planetary scientist Richard Greenwood looked at the Wilcocks' picture, he was blown away.

"It was one of those moments when your legs start going wobbly. I saw this thing; it was like a splat across [the Wilcocks'] drive; and it had all these rays coming off it; and I just thought - that is a meteorite. It was instantaneous," he said.




With all the hullabaloo that was bound to follow the discovery, Rob's initial reaction was to try to stay out of the limelight - to be anonymous.

But when he thought it through a little more, Rob said the three of them recognised they should talk about what had happened to them.

"We've been wrestling with the question of whether we should talk about it, and in the end we decided we should. There seems to be such a lot of genuine public interest in the find," Rob told BBC News.

 Thousands of people reported seeing the fireball

"We're absolutely thrilled that something that's going to be so valuable to science, to the human understanding of the world and of the Solar System has happened, and that we can be a small part in it."

The family have donated the meteorite remains to the national collection held by the Natural History Museum in London. They were determined the rock should not go to a dealer, but to science.

The last meteorite fall to be picked up in the UK was 30 years ago. That was an "ordinary chondrite" - a common type of space rock.

The Winchcombe meteorite is far more valuable. Studying its chemistry - and what it can tell us about the conditions that went into building the planets - will keep scientists busy for years.

As for the small Gloucestershire market town - it's now firmly on the map.

"We always felt that the Cotswolds is a wonderful place to live. But now the whole world seems to know about us," reflected one local resident on Tuesday afternoon.

Sea level rise is impacting populous coastal areas four times faster than global average, study says

By Jackson Dill and Brandon Miller, CNN 
3/9/2021

Coastal communities are experiencing sea level rise four times worse than global water rise, according to a new study released Monday.

© ARYA/AFP/Getty Images This aerial picture shows people rowing a raft over a flooded road in Jakarta on February 20, 2021, following heavy overnight rains. The combination of so many people and the multitude of rivers has made this city especially prone to relative sea level rise.

Groundwater pumping, extraction of materials from the ground and sediment production are all happening near the coasts and that is causing the land to actually sink -- compounding the effects of a rising sea level.

It is no coincidence that these are the same locations where people live, worsening the impacts and increasing the vulnerability.

Many of the largest, most populated cities in the world are built along the deltas of major rivers, where there is the added exposure of rivers connecting to the ocean.

Much of the coast is uninhabited by people, but where there is civilization, there tends to be a greater rise in water levels.

According to the study, it quantifies "global-mean relative sea-level rise to be 2.5 mm per year over the past two decades. However, as coastal inhabitants are preferentially located in subsiding locations, they experience an average relative sea-level rise up to four times faster at 7.8 to 9.9 mm per year."


Coastal lands are sinking


This is the first ever study that factors in land subsidence into current sea level rise observations globally.

"We've actually quantified (sea level rise) and are able to get the relative magnitude. And it's surprising -- it's surprisingly large. We're making the point that climate change is bad and climate induced sea level rise is bad," Robert Nicholls, lead author of this research and director of the UK's Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, told CNN.

"But we have this additional process that is making things even worse. And of course, these things add up. It doesn't really matter whether the sea rises or the land sinks, the people living on the coast still have the same impacts."

Sea level rise is happening in many parts of the world. Where the land is rising, sea level rise is not as significant. Not as many people live where the land is rising, however.

But where the land sinks, the relative rise of the sea is higher -- and unfortunately that is where people tend to live. In fact, more than one in five people live along the coastline where the sea level is increasing at 10 mm (or 0.4 inches) or more per year, despite the fact that it encompasses less than 1% of the world's coastline.

© Provided by CNN This global map shows the average relative sea level rise rate in millimeters per year, and is weighted for population (second map). The map is divided into 23 different coastal regions, and the shadings are based on how sea levels are currently rising every year. When weighting the data to population opposed to coastal length (first map), the sea level rise is greater because of human activity that promotes subsidence and loss of elevation. Portions of Asia are experiencing the highest rate of water rise when factoring in both the length average and population average. Source: Nature Climate Change, March 2021

In other parts of the world, like parts of the southeastern US, geological changes are not big contributors.

"There's places where the land isn't really moving much at all," said Brian McNoldy, a senior research associate at the University of Miami who was not a part of the study. "And you really are just seeing the effects of ocean levels increasing."

One of the biggest contributors to this subsidence is river deltas.

"Deltas are where rivers bring sediment to the sea," Nicholls said. "And the weight of the sediment plus the compression with the sediment causes consolidation ... So you don't get (rising land) with the deltas, you just get sinking and that can be exacerbated by groundwater withdrawal and drainage."

"Rapid rates of subsidence in deltas and especially cities on deltas are also human-caused, mostly due to groundwater pumping, also oil and gas extraction, and sediment resupply prevented by upstream dams, flood defenses, sand extraction or mining."

Scientists have already been aware of the implications of human-linked climate change to sea level rise, but now there is research that investigates rising and lowering land also caused by humans.

"The process that we're really talking about here is fundamentally down to where people choose to live. And then the fact that they actually made the subsidence worse."

There is a natural cause of the rising and sinking lands, however. According to the study, the melting ice sheets during the ice age thousands of years ago lead to and is still causing rising land near Hudson Bay in Canada.

Asia experiencing highest rate of sea level rise

Coastal sections of Asia have been the most impacted by sea level rise in relation to land subsidence. That's because there is a prevalence of deltas and very populous cities.

"South, Southeast and East Asia is noteworthy, as these regions collectively contain 71% of the global coastal population below 10 m in elevation," according to the research.

"In Jakarta, subsidences of over 10 centimeters per year -- It may be even locally faster than that. You can get very, very large changes, but in very small areas," Nicholls said. "But they're important because lots of people live there."

The map below highlights just a few of the many rivers and canals within Jakarta. The combination of so many people and the multitude of rivers has made this city especially prone to relative sea level rise.

In the US, cities like New Orleans, which is near the Mississippi River delta, are also sinking. This correlates with one of the highest rises in relative sea level in the country.

According to NOAA, the greatest relative sea level rise has been measured near coastal Louisiana and southeastern Texas.

"A place where the combined effects of sinking land and sea level rise is in the northern Gulf Coast areas, like coastal Louisiana," said McNoldy, of the University of Miami.

In Galveston, Texas, sea levels have risen 6.62 mm per year or about one-quarter of an inch per year during the time period of 1957 to 2011. NOAA said this is "equivalent to a change of 2.17 feet in 100 years."

When asked what can be done about this issue, Nicholls said mitigating the threats of climate change is most crucial.

"I think the important thing is we have a great effort, and rightly so, to actually mitigating climate change and the Paris Agreement," Nicholls said.

The report also says reducing groundwater withdrawal and managing deltas can reduce land subsidence.

First Nations say Alberta review of coal project inadequate, seek federal involvement


EDMONTON — Two of southern Alberta's largest First Nations have asked the federal government to step into an environmental review of a coal mine proposed for the Rocky Mountains.

© Provided by The Canadian Press

In a letter to federal Environment Minister Jonathan Wilkinson, the Siksika and Kainai say the review planned by Alberta's energy regulator of the Montem Resources Tent Mountain proposal falls far short.

"The proposed provincial review by the Alberta Energy Regulator is insufficient to appropriately identify the impacts to areas of federal jurisdiction, including on Kainai’s rights," says the letter from Chief Roy Fox.

An Alberta Energy spokesman said Tuesday that Alberta maintains jurisdiction over its natural resources.

Australia-based Montem plans an open-pit mine in the Crowsnest Pass that would straddle the Alberta-British Columbia boundary. The area was mined until 1983 and Montem planned to rely on previously issued approvals for its project.

In January, the Alberta Energy Regulator ruled Montem's plans required a new review. The company has since set out draft terms of reference for it.

The Kainai and Siksika have compiled a long list of concerns over those terms.

They point out that the Tent Mountain plan is to extract 4,925 tonnes of coal per day, a whisker shy of the 5,000-tonne level that would automatically trigger a federal review.

"Skirting just below the thresholds for federal designation," wrote Siksika Chief Ouray Crowfoot.

He noted that Tent Mountain would be right beside another mine being assessed, North Coal's Michel project.

"(Tent Mountain's) proximity to the threshold and the significant coal development in the area gives rise to the need for a federal review," Crowfoot wrote.

At least four other mines are being considered in the immediate area and the totality of potential coal expansion needs to be considered, said Fox.

"The cumulative impact of this activity has the potential to significantly and adversely impact the ecological integrity of the area and Kainai’s ability to use this area for the practice of their Aboriginal and Treaty rights."

The First Nations say the mine would fall under the Livingston-Porcupine Hills land-use plan, in which watershed protection is supposed to be the highest priority.

They are concerned about downstream contamination from selenium and say Montem has acknowledged water is already highly allocated.

"The proponent states that these water quality concerns may be mitigated, and even improved, by a modern water management regime ... but this remains to be seen," wrote Fox.

"Kainai’s experience is that modern water management regimes for coal projects have not been effective."

The First Nations say the mine would affect several areas of federal jurisdiction, including fish habitat, migratory birds and endangered species. They say Ottawa should step in because the mine would affect British Columbia, as well as downstream water users in Saskatchewan.

They add Alberta's review plans make no mention of treaty rights. The Alberta Energy Regulator is barred by law from considering constitutional questions.

The Kainai and Siksika point out there is little land left in the area where they can conduct traditional cultural practices that haven't already been affected by mining, energy, forestry, agriculture or settlement. They take issue with Montem's argument that since the proposed mine site is already disturbed, further work shouldn't be a problem.

"The baseline data should not reflect a previously disturbed mine that operated for decades, but the site before mining began," Fox wrote. "This will give an accurate picture of what the impacts of mining on the site have been."

Kavi Bal of Alberta Energy said federal involvement isn't needed.

"The province has the constitutional jurisdiction to regulate and develop its natural resources," he wrote in an email. "Any proposed projects must go through an intensive regulatory process ... that includes both consultation and engagement with the First Nations and Metis."

Bal pointed out that Montem has been previously told by the federal assessment agency that no federal review would be required.

Nevertheless, Environment Canada spokeswoman Moira Kelly wrote in an email that the First Nation requests are being considered.

"The agency will prepare a recommendation for the Minister of Environment and Climate Change," she said.

Among other factors, the agency will consider how close a proposal is to a trigger threshold, cumulative and cross-border effects, whether the project is being assessed by another government and impact on greenhouse gas emissions.

Ottawa is currently involved in assessments of five other coal projects in the region.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 9, 2021.

— Follow Bob Weber on Twitter at @row1960

Bob Weber, The Canadian Press

Citizens and scientists release 28-year record of water quality in Buzzards Bay

MARINE BIOLOGICAL LABORATORY

Research News

 

IMAGE: AERIAL VIEW OF THE KNOB AND QUISSETT HARBOR IN WOODS HOLE, MASS., WITH GREATER BUZZARDS BAY IN THE DISTANCE. BUZZARDS BAY IS APPROXIMATELY 28 MILES LONG BY 8 MILES WIDE... view more 

CREDIT: FISH HAWK FILMS

WOODS HOLE, Mass. -- A long-lasting, successful relationship between scientists at the MBL Ecosystems Center and the citizen-led Buzzards Bay Coalition has garnered a long-term record of water quality in the busy bay that lies west of Woods Hole. That record has already returned tremendous value and last week, it was published in Scientific Data, a Nature journal.

"We hope getting this data out will encourage scientists to use it to test new hypotheses and develop new insights into Bay health," said Rachel Jakuba, science director of the Buzzards Bay Coalition and lead author of the journal article.

Since 1992, a large and dedicated team of citizen volunteers, dubbed Baywatchers, has been collecting water samples from more than 200 sites along the coast of Buzzards Bay. The samples have been analyzed at the Marine Biological Laboratory (MBL) since 2008 under the direction of Chris Neill, a former MBL scientist who is now at Woodwell Climate Research Center, and MBL Senior Research Assistant Richard McHorney. The goal is to document the effects of nitrogen pollution in the Bay, including low oxygen levels that threaten marine life, in order to inform policies to improve Bay health.

"Baywatchers data directly influence policy by documenting impaired waters, making the public aware of long-term water quality trends, and importantly, documenting how water quality improves when communities upgrade water infrastructure, like fixing antiquated wastewater treatment plants," said Neill. "They also show the Bay's waters are warming rapidly."

The main sources of nitrogen pollution in the 430-square-mile Bay are private septic systems and underperforming wastewater treatment plants. Collaborations such as the MBL-Buzzards Bay Coalition's are essential to move science toward societal solutions.

"Scientists can provide information on the causes and consequences of excess nitrogen loading and suggest alternatives, while citizens groups can push for action and help bring together citizens, regulators, and policy makers to achieve a solution," said MBL Ecosystems Director Anne Giblin. Giblin and MBL Senior Scientist Ivan Valiela were among a group of scientists who helped the Coalition formulate and establish the Baywatchers program in the early 1990s.

Baywatchers data have been used to identify nearly 30 bodies of water around the Bay that do not meet federal standards under the Clean Water Act, evaluate wastewater discharge permits, support the development of targets for reduction of nitrogen pollution, and develop strategies for reaching those goals. And the Baywatchers program itself elevates public awareness and generates support for actions to control nutrient pollution and improve water quality.

"With a program like Baywatchers, every one of those citizen volunteers not only collects samples, they go out and talk to their friends about the nitrogen issue. That is a huge public education benefit. By making sure those volunteers are well educated in the scientific facts, you get this tremendous informal education program going," Giblin said.

Baywatchers is one of the largest and longest-running water quality monitoring programs in the country, and its dataset on water quality in Buzzards Bay keeps growing.

"Over the past 30 years, the Coalition has prioritized our commitment to comprehensive water quality monitoring above all else - placing sound science at the core of our work and successes in restoring and protecting the Bay. It is a function that continues to develop as we expand the density of our monitoring stations, parameters measured, methods for collection, and scientific collaborations. Making our entire dataset available through peer-reviewed publication is an important step and I'm indebted to the many scientists, citizens, and funders who got us to this milestone," said Rasmussen.

CAPTION

From left, The southeastern Massachusetts coast; Buzzards Bay; The Elizabeth Islands, Woods Hole and Falmouth, Mashpee and Bourne; Vineyard Sound and Martha's Vineyard, from the International Space Station in 2003.

CREDIT

Image courtesy of the Earth Science and Remote Sensing Unit, NASA Johnson Space Center

The Baywatchers Monitoring Program has been funded by the Buzzards Bay Coalition primarily through contributions from the organization's members and private foundations, legislative support from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the Buzzards Bay National Estuary Program, and the Environmental Protection Agency.

The Marine Biological Laboratory (MBL) is dedicated to scientific discovery - exploring fundamental biology, understanding marine biodiversity and the environment, and informing the human condition through research and education. Founded in Woods Hole, Massachusetts in 1888, the MBL is a private, nonprofit institution and an affiliate of the University of Chicago