Wednesday, August 18, 2021

Can start-ups fast-track fusion energy?
The drive to net zero has changed the calculus of the Promethean dream.


Melanie Windridge

First Light Fusion fires projectiles into a fusion target at around 15 kilometres per second.
Credit: First Light Fusion

The Star Builders: Nuclear Fusion and the Race to Power the Planet Arthur Turrell Scribner (2021)

To help the world reach net-zero emissions by 2050, Nick Hawker is betting on nuclear fusion. Co-founder of the start-up First Light Fusion, he says: “We need to be building plants, multiple, in the 2040s. And the first of a kind has to be built in the 2030s. Which means the physics problem has to be solved in the 2020s.” This pressure is the subject of The Star Builders — a book about those trying to harness the phenomenon that powers the Sun, as a source of almost limitless energy.


For decades, the quest for fusion power was a story of two government-funded pathways, culminating in mega projects: the US National Ignition Facility (NIF) and the international ITER collaboration, under construction in France. This history was detailed in Daniel Clery’s book A Piece of the Sun in 2013. Back then, some fusion start-up companies existed, but they weren’t taken seriously.



After COVID-19, green investment must deliver jobs to get political traction


Times have changed, technologies have changed and the stakes have changed. With global temperature rises now bringing floods and fires to every door, the need for emissions-free energy production has never been clearer. Arthur Turrell takes a good look at some of the 25 or so private fusion companies pushing towards commercialization, and appraises them alongside the public projects. Be it University of Oxford spin-off First Light Fusion in Yarnton, UK, smashing a projectile from a rail gun into a target, or Jeff Bezos-backed General Fusion in Burnaby, Canada, compressing magnetized plasma with pistons, he shows how private companies with different ideas, new kit and an eye on the bottom line are re-energizing the field.

Turrell’s background is in plasma physics. (Full disclosure: we did our PhDs at Imperial College London around the same time, and I’m mentioned in the book’s acknowledgements.) Now, he’s a data scientist at the UK Office for National Statistics and the Bank of England. His is a clear and interesting introduction to the history, physics and economics of harnessing the energy produced by melding the nuclei of light atoms to make heavier ones. He argues that “investors are betting that private companies can succeed where governments have failed”. I take slight issue with this framing, but more on that later.
Passion and expertise

So who are the people involved in the challenge — the star builders? We meet ex-astronaut Jeff Wisoff, who is now responsible for the safe operation of the NIF in Livermore, California. Jonathan Carling explains what drew him to become chief executive of Tokamak Energy in Milton Park, UK, after working in engineering at Rolls-Royce (he has since left Tokamak Energy). These characters’ passion and expertise remind us that there are social and political factors affecting how fast this field can move, as well as technical and scientific ones.

Powerful statistics conjure the scale of the energy problem. Some 86% of the world’s energy is still generated by fossil fuels. Air pollution is thought to contribute to the deaths of 8.8 million people worldwide each year, and Earth hasn’t seen carbon dioxide levels this high for at least 800,000 years. Turrell quotes Ian Chapman, chief executive of the UK Atomic Energy Authority, as saying that in 2050, “We’re going to need half as much energy again as we use now.” Fusion could be a much-needed contributor. But no one has achieved the crucial milestone of break-even, the point at which the vast energy needed to create fusion reactions — which must run at temperatures of hundreds of millions of degrees — is recouped by the energy released.

General Fusion in Canada uses steam-powered pistons to compress plasma to fusion conditions.
Credit: General Fusion

Analogies also enliven the text. The hot plasma of deuterium and tritium in a tokamak — a multi-tonne magnetic toroid that is the most advanced method of containing controlled fusion reactions — has to be pure. So pure that vacuuming out all the other particles is like “removing all but a single star from the Milky Way”. Passengers cramming into a train carriage during rush hour (remember that?) come to represent increasing plasma density. Bremsstrahlung — radiation emitted by one charged particle as it is deflected by another — is like the wave when a speedboat turns.

But a ‘public versus private’ conceit is too simplistic. Start-ups, Turrell writes “are proposing to use millions of dollars, and some crazy ideas, to do what billions of dollars, and decades of scientific investigation, have been unable to”. In fact, the firms are building on foundations laid down by national laboratories and university research.
Audacious partnerships

Developing and integrating the technologies needed to form a working and economical fusion power plant is beyond the current scope of one company or public lab. The next phase could be like the public–private partnerships between NASA and companies SpaceX and Orbital Sciences to develop commercial transportation for the International Space Station, in which cost and risk were shared.




Fuel for world’s largest fusion reactor ITER is set for test run


Decades of investment in collaborative programmes such as ITER, the NIF and the Joint European Torus in Oxfordshire, UK, plus programmes in plasma physics and high-energy-density physics, have brought fusion science to a point at which start-ups are commercializing ideas and new technologies. Now, governments are introducing programmes to stimulate the public and private sectors to work together. The key question is how best to make these partnerships flourish.

Star builders are optimistic by nature — you’d have to be, to tackle something so audacious. As a result, unrealistic timescales and over-promising have dogged fusion since the 1950s. More discussion on this would have been welcome. How much will fusion energy cost? And how long until it is powering our homes? The answers don’t yet exist. But investors, governments, utility companies and the public can be forgiven for wanting answers — and the scientists for trying to provide them.

The discussion of the dangers of fusion is thoughtful and illuminating, from the low-to-zero possibilities of weapons proliferation or meltdown to the real risks from the radioactivity that high-energy neutrons create. Objectively, Turrell compares the numbers of deaths per exajoule of energy generated by current sources such as fossil fuels, renewables and nuclear fission. Fusion emerges as much safer than any of them.

In the end, The Star Builders is realistic and positive — an interesting snapshot of the current situation and key players. And, as if the challenge of clean energy weren’t enough, Turrell has one last stretch for our imagination: to fusion propulsion for space travel. Humanity, he shows, is always reaching for the stars.

Nature 596, 341-342 (2021)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-02203-4


COMPETING INTERESTS

M.W. acts as a consultant for Tokamak Energy, one of the private companies featured in the book, and is UK director of the Fusion Industry Association (consultant rather than employee), which is the organization that represents private fusion companies.

UK introducing regulation for nuclear shipping

16 August 2021


The UK has launched a consultation on proposed regulations for nuclear-powered ships that would enable UK-flagged vessels to use the power source and international vessels to visit its ports. "The UK is committed to enabling the adoption of new technologies that manufacturers and ship owners may choose to meet legal requirements relating to air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, and therefore will establish a regulatory framework that will support nuclear-powered ships as an alternative fuel option," said the UK Maritime & Coastguard Agency (MCA).

In March this year, plans were announced for the Earth 300 - a 300-metre-long, nuclear-powered research ship - scheduled to launch in 2025 (Image: Earth 300 Ventures)

To do this, MCA wants to create national legislation that mirrors provisions of the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) and the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) Code of Safety for Nuclear Merchant Ships - also known as the Nuclear Code - that the convention refers to. Signatories to SOLAS are obligated to do this, but the UK has lagged behind by some 40 years by not matching the 1981 Nuclear Code.

Filling this "regulatory gap", as the MCA calls it, would install a ready-made suite of regulation providing for the construction and operation of UK ships using nuclear power, as well as for nuclear powered ships with flags of other countries visiting UK ports.

The proposed regulations would introduce a dedicated nuclear pre-commissioning test programme as well as surveys during the construction and trial phases for quality assurance and to verify a ship is built in line with requirements. There would also be regular surveys of the nuclear portion of a ship during its operational life.

SOLAS signatories are responsible for making sure vessels under their flag comply with its regulations, and are empowered to check vessels of other flag nations if there are grounds to think standards are not being met.

MCA is including an "ambulatory" clause in its proposed legislation, which provides for UK rules to stay in line with other countries if IMO regulations change.

The cost of the change would be very small, MCA said, given there are no nuclear ships on the UK flag at present, and there are no published plans for any with the next ten years. It therefore will not affect any ongoing operation or project.

MCA plans to review consultation responses in November and introduce the new legislation in December.

Canadian regulator issues order on plant restarts


The operators of the Bruce, Darlington and Pickering nuclear power plants must submit data to demonstrate the safe operation of pressure tubes and obtain regulatory authorisation before restarting any currently shut-down reactors at those sites. The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) says it has issued orders to Bruce Power and Ontario Power Generation out of an "abundance of caution".

Bruce (Image: Bruce Power)

The regulator earlier this month issued formal notices to all nuclear power plant licensees in Canada, requesting further analysis on the continued safe operation of pressure tubes, due to Bruce Power finding elevated levels of hydrogen equivalent in the pressure tubes of two units that are currently shut down.

"Following this regulatory action, our staff have now issued orders to both Bruce Power and Ontario Power Generation. Effective July 26 (Bruce Power) and July 27 (OPG) these orders are to ensure any units currently offline at the Bruce, Pickering and Darlington nuclear generating stations, along with any other reactors that go offline at these sites going forward, are not restarted until the Commission authorises them to do so," the CNSC said.

"These orders have been issued out of an abundance of caution, and we do not see this as an imminent safety issue. We have increased our regulatory oversight in light of the recent findings, to ensure that licensees continue to operate within their approved licensing basis."

Bruce Power said higher-than-anticipated readings were observed during part of ongoing planned inspection, testing, analysis and maintenance activities at Bruce units 3 and 6. Unit 3 is in a routine inspection and maintenance outage, while unit 6 is undergoing its Major Component Replacement, where all pressure tubes are being replaced.

"We completed an immediate review of this following our rigorous processes and concluded there was no impact on the safety of the units. All six units that are currently operating have recently undergone similar inspections and demonstrated fitness for service," the company said.

"We proactively shared this information with the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and with other CANDU operators to ensure we continue to contribute to the collective understanding from these inspection activities, which we collaborate on through the CANDU Owners Group."

Inspection activities have demonstrated the ongoing safe operation of the pressure tubes, which will continue to be thoroughly inspected in future planned outages, the company said. "As has clearly been expressed, safety is not impacted and Bruce Power will use its robust inspection tools and results to continue to demonstrate safety and fitness for service of these components and will provide this information to the CNSC."

Monitoring Fukushima radiation on land and sea

Japanese laboratories monitoring radionuclides in seawater, marine sediment and fish near the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant continue to produce reliable data, according to a new International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report. Meanwhile, Tokyo Electric Power Company plans to rear fish in treated radioactive water from the plant to demonstrate its safety. A University of Georgia study has shown that radioactive contamination in the Fukushima Exclusion Zone can be measured through its resident snakes.

Seawater samples being taken near the Fukushima Daiichi plant (Image: IAEA)

The IAEA has since 2014 organised missions to support the collection of marine samples for interlaboratory comparisons of radioactivity analyses. The first phase of the Marine Monitoring Confidence Building and Data Quality Assurance project covered the years 2014 to 2016. It found that Japan produced reliable data on marine samples near Fukushima Daiichi plant.

In this second phase of the project, the IAEA carried out a range of activities focused on marine monitoring data quality, including interlaboratory comparisons (ILCs) of seawater, sediment and fish samples collected in four sampling missions conducted from 2017 to 2020 near the Fukushima Daiichi plant.

ILCs involve different laboratories separately testing and analysing samples and then comparing results and procedures to determine their reliability and accuracy. The samples in the second phase of the project were analysed at 12 laboratories in Japan, at the IAEA Environment Laboratories in Monaco and two laboratories in other Member States (in Canada and Switzerland) that are part of the network of Analytical Laboratories for the Measurement of Environmental Radioactivity.

"Following these ILCs, the IAEA can confidently report that Japan's sample collection procedures follow the appropriate methodological standards required to obtain representative samples," the new report states. It added that "the results obtained demonstrate a continued high level of accuracy and competence on the part of the Japanese laboratories involved in the analyses of radionuclides in marine samples for the (country's) Sea Area Monitoring Plan".

"It can be concluded that over 97% of the results were not significantly different from each other, and this shows that the participating Japanese laboratories have the capacity to accurately analyse the samples," said Florence Descroix-Comanducci, director of the IAEA's environment laboratories in Monaco. "The results also demonstrate a high level of consistency among the Japanese laboratories and with laboratories in other countries and the IAEA."

The IAEA Marine Monitoring Confidence Building and Data Quality Assurance collaboration with Japan has been extended for a further two years in order to conduct additional ILCs and proficiency tests and build on the already completed work.

Impact on marine life


At the Fukushima Daiichi site, contaminated water is treated by the Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS), which removes most of the radioactive contamination, with the exception of tritium. This treated water is currently stored in tanks on-site. The total tank storage capacity amounts to about 1.37 million cubic metres. As of 15 July, almost 1.27 million cubic metres of treated water were being held in the storage tanks. All the tanks are expected to be full around the summer of 2022.

In April, the Japanese government announced its formal decision that the treated water stored at the Fukushima Daiichi site will be discharged into the sea. The basic policy calls for the ALPS-treated water to be discharged "on the condition that full compliance with the laws and regulations is observed, and measures to minimise adverse impacts on reputation are thoroughly implemented".

Japan intends to start releasing the treated water in early 2023, and the entire operation could last for decades.

Tokyo Electric Power Company yesterday announced plans to rear fish, shellfish and seaweed in seawater containing ALPS-treated water. The test is aimed at aimed at easing safety concerns about the release of the water into the sea.

Information will be gathered on the occurrence of health-related abnormalities, as well as the hatching rate of eggs and the survival rate of matured fish. A comparison will also be made of the concentration of radioactive materials, including tritium, in the water used for the trial and the subjects' bodies.

The test is due to begin in the second quarter of 2022. "Rearing is planned to be continued for a while after discharge has been initiated," the company said.

Reptilian receptors


Meanwhile, a study from the University of Georgia (UGA) has shown that radioactive contamination around the Fukushima plant can be measured through tracking snakes. Rat snakes, it says, travel short distances and can accumulate high levels of radionuclides, making them an effective bioindicator of residual radioactivity.

According to the researchers, the snakes' limited movement and close contact with contaminated soil are key factors in their ability to reflect the varying levels of contamination in the area. Tracked snakes were found to move an average of just 65 metres per day.

The team tracked nine rat snakes using a combination of GPS transmitters and manual very-high frequency tracking. The researchers identified 1718 locations of the snakes while tracking them for over a month in the Abukuma Highlands, approximately 15 miles northwest of the Fukushima Daiichi plant.

The new study's findings reinforce the team's previous study published in 2020, which indicated the levels of radiocaesium in the snakes had a high correlation to the levels of radiation in the soil where the snakes were captured.

"Snakes are good indicators of environmental contamination because they spend a lot of time in and on soil," said James Beasley, associate professor at of UGA's Savannah River Ecology Laboratory (SERL) and the Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources. "They have small home ranges and are major predators in most ecosystems, and they’re often relatively long-lived species."

"Our results indicate that animal behaviour has a large impact on radiation exposure and contaminant accumulation," said Hanna Gerke, an alumna of SERL and Warnell. "Studying how specific animals use contaminated landscapes helps increase our understanding of the environmental impacts of huge nuclear accidents such as Fukushima and Chernobyl."

Researched and written by World Nuclear News

In high definition: Astronomers capture most detailed-ever images of galaxies

WION Web Team
London, United Kingdom Published: Aug 18, 2021, 

Most detailed image of galaxy
 (Credit: LOFAR & Hubble Space Telescope) Photograph:( Others )


After almost a decade of work, the images were created from data collected by the Low-Frequency Array (LOFAR), a radio telescope

Astronomers have published the most detailed images yet seen of galaxies beyond our own, revealing their inner workings in unprecedented detail.

After almost a decade of work, the images were created from data collected by the Low-Frequency Array (LOFAR), a radio telescope.


LOFAR is a network of more than 70,000 small antennae spread across nine European counties, with its core in Exloo, the Netherlands.

The new images push the boundaries of what we know about galaxies and supermassive black holes.

According to Dr. Neal Jackson of The University of Manchester, “These high-resolution images allow us to zoom in to see what’s really going on when super-massive black holes launch radio jets, which wasn’t possible before at frequencies near the FM radio band.”

Scientists believe that at some point, high-energy ultraviolet radiation from exploded stars split the intergalactic hydrogen atoms into electrons and protons. Once ionised, the hydrogen would be electrically conductive and no longer scatter light.

Those elements are forged by nuclear fusion inside stars, so either the galaxy contains the exploded remains of lots of massive stars or it formed in a region of space that had been previously seeded with the remnants of a prior generation of stars, scientists said.

“Our aim is that this allows the scientific community to use the whole European network of LOFAR telescopes for their own science, without having to spend years to become an expert,” said lead author Dr. Leah Morabito from Durham University.

The immense regions between star systems in a galaxy are not a complete vacuum. The stew of matter and radiation present in low densities, mostly gas, is called the interstellar medium.

About 15 per cent of the visible matter in our Milky Way galaxy is composed of this interstellar gas, dust, and energetic particles like cosmic rays.

Much of the interstellar medium is in what is called an ionised, or electrically charged, state called plasma.

Galaxies are surrounded by black holes that are extremely dense, with gravitational pulls so ferocious not even light escapes.

There are three categories of black holes. The smallest, like 'the Unicorn,' are so-called stellar-mass black holes formed by the gravitational collapse of a single star. There are gargantuan 'supermassive' black holes like the one at our galaxy's center, 26,000 light-years from Earth, which is four million times the sun's mass. A few intermediate-mass black holes also have been found with masses somewhere in between.

(With inputs from agencies)

 A UNION BY ANY OTHER NAME

Ontario to give optometrists $39M as they threaten to withdraw services

The Ontario Association of Optometrists says it has been subject to 'years of underfunding'

The one-time payment comes after optometrists threatened to stop conducting eye exams covered by provincial health insurance. (Syda Productions/Shutterstock)

Ontario says it will immediately pay $39 million to the province's optometrists to retroactively account for the increased costs of services funded by the government.

The one-time payment comes after optometrists threatened to stop conducting eye exams covered by provincial health insurance in September.

The province says it hopes the payment will preserve access to care as discussions with optometrists continue.

It is calling on the Ontario Association of Optometrists to continue negotiations on operating costs and future fee increases.

The Ontario Association of Optometrists has said it has been subject to "years of underfunding," noting that the province paid optometrists $39.15 on average for an exam in 1989 and now pays $44.65 for the service.

The group said the situation has left optometrists absorbing 45 per cent of the cost of an eye exam.

The Ontario Health Insurance Plan covers one annual major eye exa

Astronomer Vera Rubin Taught Me about Dark Matter—and about How to Live Life

The groundbreaking scientist ushered in a revolution in how we think about the universe. She also lived by a set of principles that made her an exceptional human being


By Ashley Jean Yeager on August 17, 2021
Rubin at her office at the Carnegie Institution of Washington in 2010, at the age of 82. Credit: Linda Davidson Getty Images


“Could I come to the telescope with you?” I innocently asked the late astronomer Vera Rubin that question a few weeks after I met her in 2007.

Even then, in her late 70s, Rubin continued her trips to places such as Kitt Peak National Observatory to scour the outermost edges of far-flung galaxies in order to clock how quickly the galaxies’ stars whipped around their cores. In our solar system, Mercury whips around the sun at high velocity, while Pluto merely plods along, and astronomers naturally assumed that stars close to a galaxy’s core would similarly move faster than stars out at the edge.

Yet years of work with her collaborator Kent Ford and other colleagues had revealed that this isn’t true; the stars farthest out tend to move just as swiftly as stars closer in. In the 1960s and 1970s, this observation shocked scientists. It implied that the gravity from some invisible form of matter was making the outermost stars move unexpectedly quickly—and that there was vastly more matter in the cosmos that astronomers originally thought. It meant, as Rubin so adeptly noted in 1985, the universe had been playing a trick on us, keeping the majority of the universe’s matter hidden from view.


I had not known about the universe’s trick until I came across a description of Rubin’s research while interning at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C., and wandering around the Explore the Universe exhibit. Reading about Rubin, my brain buzzed. Who was she? Why hadn’t I heard more about her? Did we really not know what most of the universe was made of? I peppered my supervisor, David DeVorkin, with these questions and others. He pointed me to Rubin’s collection of essays, Bright Galaxies, Dark Matters. A day later he asked: “Would like you to interview Vera?”

Absolutely, yes, I said. DeVorkin was working on Rubin’s oral history, which he wanted to finish. I read and researched, preparing questions. On the day of the interview, Rubin welcomed us into her office at the Department of Terrestrial Magnetism, the same one she’d shared with Ford for decades. Dozens of stories and anecdotes later, we headed to Rubin’s home not far from Chevy Chase, where both Vera and Robert Rubin, her husband, answered our questions. The couple finished each other’s thoughts. They made each other laugh. In that afternoon, their love and respect for each other were obvious, even unspoken. That’s the kind of relationship I want, I remember thinking.

Finding a partner who was patient, kind and as invested in your career as in their own, was advice Rubin often gave in talks and interviews. She not only said it. She lived it. She also showed me how to make others feel important. Even though I was a stranger, an intern, she listened to me. She asked me questions about my aspirations. She encouraged me. She didn’t have to do that. She chose to.

Because I felt Rubin was so approachable, I dared to write and ask to go to the telescope with her. She thanked me for my “sweet letter,” and in a September 20, 2007 e-mail wrote, “The answer is yes, but … telescope time is very valuable and making mistakes is very easy.” She told me when to arrive at the telescope, when to watch her work and when to ask questions. And then she said, “Bring a warm coat or jacket … we’ll be observing in a warm room but have to go out to the telescope sometimes.” She was open to my request, set boundaries and still looked out for my well-being. High expectations and warmth (no coat pun intended) again were traits I wanted to emulate.

On that crisp night in mid-November 2007, we met at Kitt Peak. That first night there, she flicked a switch, and the darkness of the telescope’s dome swallowed her. She quickly and confidently took a few steps, grabbed the staircase railing, and climbed up. At the top, she slid her hand across the door, found the knob and pushed. Nothing happened. Like a football lineman, she lowered her center of gravity and threw her weight against the hinged hunk of metal, bumping it open with her hip. That scene became the opening of my book, Bright Galaxies, Dark Matter and Beyond, a tour of Rubin’s life. In it, I try to convey her grace, wit and grit, even in the face of sexism and sometimes scorn for her research. I also explore the life lessons she taught me: Listen, speak up against injustice, be fearless and, above all, be curious.
ADVERTISEMENT

“Don’t shoot for the stars, we already know what’s there,” she once said. “Shoot for the space in between because that’s where the real mystery lies.”

This essay was adapted from the author's new book Bright Galaxies, Dark Matter and Beyond.

This is an opinion and analysis article; the views expressed by the author or authors are not necessarily those of Scientific American.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S)
Ashley Jean Yeager is the associate news editor at Science News. She holds a bachelor's degree in journalism from the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, and a master's degree in science writing from MIT. She is the author of Bright Galaxies, Dark Matter and Beyond, a biography of astronomer Vera Rubin. Follow her on Twitter @AshleyJYeager.


Astronomers were skeptical about dark matter — until Vera Rubin came along


She built a bulletproof case for exploring the concept.
Aug 17, 2021, 8:00am EDT
Vera Rubin in 2010, at her office in Washington, DC. 
Linda Davidson/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Vera Rubin didn’t “discover” dark matter, but she put it on the map.

Dark matter is a wild concept. It’s the idea that some mind-boggling percentage of all the matter in the universe may be invisible, and wholly unlike the matter that makes up Earth. Rubin is celebrated because she forced much of the astronomy community to take it seriously.

That reckoning moment came in 1985, when she stood in front of the International Astronomical Union and walked the audience through some of the data she had collected.

Her data showed that stars at the edges of multiple galaxies were moving in ways that didn’t make sense, according to the rules of physics. One possible explanation for this strange phenomenon, Rubin suggested, was the existence of a mysterious “dark matter” at the edges of the galaxy. In the decades since that talk, research into dark matter has exploded, revolutionizing astronomy.

In Bright Galaxies, Dark Matter, and Beyond, a new biography of Rubin, science journalist Ashley Yeager explains how Rubin, who died in 2016, grew from a young researcher whose bold ideas were initially ignored into the kind of scientist who could change an entire field. In 2020, we interviewed Yeager for an episode of the Unexplainable podcast about dark matter. A transcript of our conversation, lightly edited for length and clarity, follows.

Noam Hassenfeld

When did Vera Rubin first get interested in astronomy? What’s her origin story?
Ashley Yeager

About the age of 11 is when she started to look at the stars. Vera and her sister, Ruth, shared a bedroom in their Washington, DC, townhouse. And Ruth remembers Vera constantly crawling over her at night to be able to open the windows and look out at the night sky and start to track the stars. So clearly, Vera was captivated by the night sky. And that stuck with her.

She then went to Vassar, where she studied astronomy. [While at Vassar, she met a mathematician named Robert Rubin.] They ended up getting married. And that drove one of the biggest decisions in Vera’s life, because she wanted to go to graduate school for astronomy.

She’d gotten into Harvard, but Robert Rubin was at Cornell. He was well into his graduate studies. They had to make a choice, and Vera said, “Let’s stay together. I’ll come to Cornell with you and I’ll do my master’s in astronomy while you finish your PhD in physics.”

Noam Hassenfeld

Isn’t that kind of a wild choice? To choose Cornell based on a husband?

Ashley Yeager

It’s the late 1940s. And Vera, in some ways, was very traditional, even though she was nontraditional in other ways. She felt that she was expected to get married by the end of her four years at Vassar. That was still something that was societally kind of expected.

And I actually think it set her up to be more successful than maybe she would have been, had she gone to Harvard or Princeton or somewhere else, just because of the exposure that she got. There was intellectual freedom she had at Cornell, to be able to probe into different questions in astronomy that she probably would have been pushed away from, had she been in a more structured graduate program.

Noam Hassenfeld

So she’s at Cornell. She’s probing into questions. She’s got a lot of intellectual freedom. What are the big questions that are occupying her mind?

Ashley Yeager

The biggest one, which becomes her master’s thesis, is really the idea of “Does the universe rotate?”

Noam Hassenfeld

Wait, does the universe rotate?

Ashley Yeager

So, probably no. This was a question posed by a very eccentric astronomer named George Gamow. Vera’s husband actually showed Vera this paper that George Gamow had written about this idea. And she thought, “Well, why would we not try to answer that question?”

Noam Hassenfeld

The kind of question that, if she were at another university, maybe she wouldn’t have had the freedom to dive into?

Ashley Yeager

I think so. I get the sense, reading through the literature and looking through the history, that she probably would have been guided to a more traditional question.

And as she started to look through the data, the numbers started to suggest that there was this odd, sideways motion that perhaps could be interpreted as a universal rotation. She presented her idea to her master’s thesis adviser, William Shaw.

He says, “Your conclusion is really good. I want to present it under my name at this upcoming astronomy conference.”

And Vera is like, “No! I might not be a member of this society yet. But you’re not presenting my data for me. I’m going to present it under my own name, come hell or high water.”

Noam Hassenfeld

So does she?

Ashley Yeager

Yes. She goes to this meeting. Apparently, the drive from New York to Pennsylvania, where the meeting was, was harrowing. It was the winter, snowy. They had a newborn in the car. Her dad was actually driving because he was the only one with a car at the time.

But she gives the presentation, and the reaction is less than great. There are some heavy critics in the room. A lot of scoffing. She does have one person, Martin Schwarzschild, who encourages her. He says, “This is really interesting. But we need more data to be able to make this conclusion.”

And that’s a criticism that really sticks with her throughout her career. Later on, she really tries to have or collect as much data as possible to support her conclusions, just because of that experience.

Noam Hassenfeld

What happens next?

Ashley Yeager

She takes a little bit of a break, because she really has this strong sense of wanting to set up a home and start a family. There’s this moment in the early 1950s, when she’s at the playground with her son. She had been reading astrophysical journals to stay connected with what was going on in astronomy.

So her son’s playing in the sandbox and she’s reading the journal, and she just breaks into tears because she misses doing research so much. She misses that curiosity of asking questions and searching for data, and really trying to figure out the answers to how the universe works.

It’s at that point that her husband says, “You need to go back to school. It’s time. We’ll figure out child care. We’ll figure out how to get dinners made. But let’s do it.”

Noam Hassenfeld

So she goes back into astronomy. And eventually she starts doing research at Kitt Peak National Observatory, right? What’s that like?

Ashley Yeager

We’re talking late 1960s. This is a 84-inch telescope, very large. Vera is at the telescope with Kent Ford, her collaborator. They’re looking at this galaxy called Andromeda, which is our nearest neighbor. They’re looking at these really young, hot stars on the edge of the galaxy, and they’re trying to get the speeds of these stars — how fast are these stars going around Andromeda?

So they’re looking at the data, and they’re going, “Oh my gosh, this is not what we expected.” The assumption was that the stars closer in would fly around the sun fast, and the stars farther out would go super slow. But these stars were moving faster than they expected.

The only way for those stars far out in the galaxy to move that fast is [that] there’s got to be something happening out there that we don’t understand.

Noam Hassenfeld

What does she think is going on?

Ashley Yeager

Well, she’s not really sure. And again, she doesn’t like to make assumptions or speak without data. So she and Kent Ford, and a couple other people, they really start to do a systematic study of galaxies.

She does 20 galaxies, and then 40, and then 60. And they all show this bizarre behavior of stars, these stars out far in the galaxy, moving way, way too fast. So at that point, you know, the astronomy community is like, “Okay, we have to deal with this.”

In 1985, Vera Rubin gives this talk at the IAU. She says, “Nature has played a trick on us. That we have been studying matter that makes up only a small fraction of the universe. The rest of the universe is stuff that we don’t understand, and we can’t see it.”

And I think because she did this in so many galaxies — we’re talking 60 galaxies — there was really no denying it. It was really her work that pushed the community over the edge, to say we have to accept the idea that dark matter exists.

Noam Hassenfeld

It sounds like if you really want to upend our entire conception of the universe, you have to come with some data.

Ashley Yeager

Yeah, absolutely. Because she held onto that criticism of her master’s and PhD work — she would just go after the data, and really make sure that the story she told from that data rang true.

One of the things that made her a remarkable scientist is her perseverance. She did face a lot of roadblocks, especially because she was a woman in science in the 1940s, 1950s, 1960s. She had to really persevere. Unfortunately, she will never get to see or know what dark matter is. But I don’t know that she had a problem with that. She would take pride in the fact that she opened a whole new realm of astronomy and physics.

She basically created more questions than answers, and I think that’s the mark of a remarkable scientist: when you open up these questions that no one ever thought of before. When you create a whole new generation of scientists who can go and answer them.

A 'mermaid' species of algae discovered on Andaman and Nicobar islands
WION Web Team
New Delhi, India Published: Aug 17, 2021, 

Acetabularia jalakanyakae Photograph:( Twitter )

The name Acetabularia jalakanyakae is inspired by the tale of the Little Mermaid by Danish writer Hans Christian Anderson

The Andaman Islands' archipelago has yielded a new species of plant. Indian biologists discovered the marine green algae during a visit to the island in 2019.

Researchers from the Punjab Central University have named the species Acetabularia jalakanyakae. After nearly four decades, a new species of algae has been discovered on the islands.

Also read | Volcanic eruption under sea creates new crescent-shaped island in Japan

According to the scientists, the name "Jalakanyaka" which means mermaid in Sanskrit, is a reference to the story of Little Mermaid by Danish writer Hans Christian Anderson.

The scientists confirmed that they had discovered this species for the first time after nearly two years of the laborious identification process.

Over 18 months, the researchers sequenced the plant DNA and compared its form with that of other plants.

Dr Felix Bast, who led the study, said the newly discovered species is stunning. Its caps appear to be umbrellas of mermaids.

Also read | Researchers calculate constant pi to a new record 62.8tn figures

The plant consists of a single gigantic cell with a nucleus, which is its main characteristic. This discovery was described in an article in the Indian Journal of Geo-Marine Sciences.

Andaman and Nicobar Islands contain some of the world's last healthy coral reefs, as well as a rich diversity of other organisms and algae.

The looming threat of climate change, as well as higher seawater temperatures and acidifying oceans, poses major stress to these ecosystems.

As per Dr Bast, seawater temperatures are rising, leading to a decrease in oxygen concentration in the water, a consequence dangerous to everything that needs oxygen to survive, including this species.
Who Created the Renewable-Energy Miracle?


The Paul Krugman newsletter

As terrible as many things in the world are, climate is unique in posing an existential threat to civilization. And it’s horrifying that so many political figures are dead set against any serious action to address that threat.

Despite that, there’s still a chance that we’ll do enough to avoid catastrophe — not because we’ve grown wiser but because we’ve been lucky. We used to believe that achieving big reductions in greenhouse gas emissions would be difficult and expensive, although not nearly as costly as anti-environmentalists claimed. Over the past dozen years or so, however, we’ve experienced a technological miracle. As nicely documented in an article by Max Roser, the costs of solar and wind power, once dismissed as foolish hippie fantasies, have plunged to the point that quite modest incentives could lead to a rapid reduction in use of fossil fuels:

Here comes the sun. Our World in Data

But was it really luck? Did this miracle — actually two miracles, since generating electricity from the sun and from the wind involve completely different technologies — just happen to arrive in our moment of need? Or was it a consequence of good policy decisions?

The answer is that there’s a pretty good case that policy — the Obama administration’s investments in green energy and European subsidies, especially for offshore wind — played a central role.

What’s the justification for that conclusion? Start with the fact that neither wind nor solar power was a fundamentally new technology. Windmills have been in widespread use at least since the 11th century. Photovoltaic solar power was developed in the 1950s. And as far as I can tell, there haven’t been any major scientific breakthroughs behind the recent dramatic decline in both technologies’ costs.

What we’re looking at, instead, appears to be a situation in which growing use of renewable energy is itself driving cost reductions. For solar and wind, we’ve seen a series of incremental improvements as energy companies gain experience, big reductions in the price of components as things like turbine blades go into mass production and so on. Renewables, as Roser points out, appear to be subject to learning curves, in which costs fall with cumulative production.

And here’s the thing: When an industry has a steep learning curve, government support can have huge positive effects. Subsidize such an industry for a few years, and its costs will fall with experience, and eventually it will reach a tipping point where its growth becomes self-sustaining and the subsidies are no longer needed.

That’s arguably what has happened, or is on the verge of happening, for renewable energy.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 — the Obama stimulus — was mainly intended to address the collapse in demand that followed the 2008 financial crisis. It helped a lot but got a bad reputation all the same because it was underpowered and hence failed to produce rapid recovery. (And no, that’s not hindsight. I was screaming about it at the time.) But it also included significant funding for green energy: tax breaks, subsidies, government loans and loan guarantees.

Some of the projects the government backed went bad, and Republicans made political hay over the losses. But venture capitalists expect some of the businesses they back to fail; if that never happens, they aren’t taking enough risks. Similarly, a government program aimed at advancing technology is bound to end up with some lemons; if it doesn’t, it’s not extending the frontier.

And in retrospect, it looks as if those Obama initiatives really did extend the frontier, pushing solar energy in particular from a high-cost technology with limited adoption to the point that it’s often cheaper than traditional energy sources.

Obama’s policies also helped wind, but there I suspect that a lot of the credit goes to European governments, which heavily subsidized offshore wind projects early in the last decade.

In short, there’s a really good case to be made that government support for renewable energy created a cost miracle that might not have happened otherwise — and this cost miracle may be the key to saving us from utter climate catastrophe.

MOST SCIENCE IS CITIZEN SCIENCE
How a volcano and flaming red sunsets led an amateur scientist in Hawaii to discover jet streams

August 16, 2021 8.09am EDT

The eruption of Krakatoa in 1883 sent volcanic dust and gases circling the Earth, creating spectacular sunsets captured by artists. William Ashcroft via Houghton Library/Harvard University


On the evening of Sept. 5, 1883, people in Honolulu witnessed a spectacular sunset followed by a period of extended twilight described as a “singular lurid after sunset glow.” There were no signs of anything else out of the ordinary, but these exceptional twilight glows returned each morning and evening over the following weeks.

Among the mystified Honolulu citizens was 56-year-old Rev. Sereno Edwards Bishop, who in his varied career in Hawaii had been a chaplain, school principal and surveyor, and who had a keen interest in science. Over the subsequent weeks and months, the exceptional twilight glows occurred around the whole globe. Remarkably, as scientists first grappled with understanding the origin of the twilight glows, Bishop’s efforts would lead to the first convincing explanation.

Rev. Sereno Edwards Bishop (1827–1909) Wikipedia

His discoveries led to scientific investigations of the winds high above the ground and ultimately yielded information that today is used to forecast weather over extended periods.

I am a meteorologist in Hawaii who helped revive appreciation of Bishop’s seminal contribution to the scientific exploration of the upper atmosphere.
A volcanic eruption half a world away

Today we know that the 1883 glows were caused by the sun below the visible horizon illuminating a mist of small liquid droplets in the atmosphere high above the ground.

The mist was made of sulfuric acid droplets that were formed by reactions of the massive amounts of sulfur dioxide gas produced by the explosive eruption of Mount Krakatoa close to the equator in Indonesia on Aug. 27, 1883. The eruption sent the droplets high into the atmosphere, where the winds transported them around the world. They spread gradually, and it was November before people in London began to notice the glow.

Much later, scientists observed similar effects after the June 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines. The material Pinatubo injected into the upper atmosphere could be followed in detail with satellite observations, and their connection with spectacular sunsets and twilight glows was clearly established.

Sketches of twilight and afterglow on one evening in 1883 in London following the Krakatoa eruption. William Ashcroft via Houghton Library/Harvard University

In 1883, Bishop had no idea that there had been a volcanic eruption until the San Francisco newspapers arrived. Very quickly, he formulated a hypothesis that he published as a letter in his local newspaper.

“I am disposed to conjecture that some very light element among the vapors of the Java eruptions has continued at a very great height in the atmosphere, and has been borne … across the Pacific into this region,” Bishop wrote.

He realized that he could connect the eruption to the glowing skies most credibly by gathering reports of the first appearance of the glows elsewhere and tracking the initial spread of the “vapor” from Krakatoa. Bishop continued his letter: “I earnestly invite, in behalf of science, all shipmasters and mates to publish what they may have observed at sea.”

Bishop assembled a dozen such reports over the first three weeks after the eruption and was able to show that the “vapor” that produced the glows had moved westward from Krakatoa, along the equator to reach Honolulu 10 days later. This implied that there was a wind high in the atmosphere blowing steadily with an extreme speed that, at ground level, is seen only in hurricanes.
Tracking the red sunsets following the Krakatoa eruption. The stars mark the initial reports and dates of seeing the exceptional twilight colors in 1883.

Bishop published his observations in The Hawaiian Monthly, concluding that there was “a vast stream of smoke due west with great precision along a narrow equatorial belt with an enormous velocity, around the globe.”

The equatorial jet stream

Bishop called the motion of the volcanic aerosol a “smoke stream.” In fact, the equatorial winds transporting the aerosol were the first discovery of what meteorologists now call a jet stream.

A half-century would pass before the experiences of pilots flying at heights of several miles revealed the existence of the extratropical jet streams lower down in the atmosphere that are now familiar from TV newscasts. Jet streams are strong, typically narrow bands of wind. The more familiar lower atmospheric jet streams move weather systems in the middle latitudes from west to east. By contrast, Bishop’s jet stream circles the equator at high altitudes and actually can blow from east to west.

Bishop’s work opened further exploration of the equatorial jet stream that culminated in the 1961 discovery that the equatorial jet stream varied from strong east winds to strong west winds roughly every other year. This so-called Quasi-biennial Oscillation has been shown to connect with weather near the ground, particularly in Europe and the North Atlantic, a fact that is now routinely exploited in making long range forecasts for the weather.

Bishop’s contribution was acknowledged by the scientists who first followed him, and he won a prize from New York’s Warner Observatory in a contest for essays explaining the post-Krakatoa glows. Bishop even merited a brief obituary in an American meteorological science journal.

Bishop, who was the son of missionaries, could also be a divisive figure in Hawaii. He supported the U.S. annexation of the islands, and his religious views opposed some native Hawai'ian traditions, such as the hula dance. His contributions to science were largely forgotten in the 20th century.

An international scientific committee’s celebration of the 60th anniversary of the Quasi-biennial Oscillation discovery is an opportunity to remember Bishop and his discovery.


Author
Kevin Hamilton
Emeritus Professor of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Hawaii
LOOK: Sicily's Mount Etna taller than ever after six months of activity
Mount Etna, Europe's most active volcano, lights up the early morning sky with smoke and lava during an eruption. Picture: Etna Walk/Handout via Reuters

By AFP Aug 16, 2021

Rome - Mount Etna's southeastern crater has grown in height after six months of activity, Italy's vulcano monitoring agency said Tuesday, making Europe's tallest active volcano taller than ever.

The famous volcano's youngest and most active crater has risen to a new record of 3 357 metres above sea level, said INGV, the National Institute for Geophysics and Vulcanology, based in the Sicilian city of Catania.

"Thanks to the analysis and processing of satellite images, the south-east crater is now much higher than its 'older brother', the north-east crater, for 40 years the undisputed peak of Etna," the INGV wrote in a press release.

Some 50 episodes of ash and lava belching from the mouth of the crater since mid-February have led to a "conspicuous transformation of the volcano's outline", with its dimensions calculated through satellite images, it said.

The northeastern crater of Etna reached a record height of 3 350 metres in 1981, but a collapse at its edges reduced that to 3,326 metres, recorded in 2018.

The crater has been churning out smoke and ash since February, while posing little danger to surrounding villages.

Mount Etna in Sicily has roared back into spectacular volcanic action
Europe's largest active volcano sent an eruptive cloud that reached a height of 11 kilometres (6.83 miles) above sea level. According to the Catania Institute for Geophysics and Volcanology, it also caused ash and debris to fall on some villages located on the slopes of the volcano. There was no impact on the operations of the nearby Catania international airport....

Sicily's government estimated in July that 300,000 tonnes of ash had been cleaned up so far.

The ash has been a nuisance in surrounding areas, dirtying streets, slowing traffic and damaging crops.

In Catania, a two-hour drive from the volcano, pensioner Tania Cannizzaro told AFP that Mount Etna was both beautiful and an annoyance, with ash sometimes falling "like rain".

Streams of red hot lava flow as Mount Etna, Europe's most active volcano, erupts. Picture: Etna Walk/Giuseppe Distefano/Handout via Reuters

"Depending on the wind, the rumblings of the volcano reach Catania and make the windows shake," she said, adding that the ashes turn the streets and balconies black.

"But there is also the spectacle, especially in the evening, when you see this red plume that moves."
Lethal autonomous weapons and World War III: it’s not too late to stop the rise of ‘killer robots’


The STM Kargu attack drone. STM


August 11, 2021 10.12pm EDT

Last year, according to a United Nations report published in March, Libyan government forces hunted down rebel forces using “lethal autonomous weapons systems” that were “programmed to attack targets without requiring data connectivity between the operator and the munition”. The deadly drones were Turkish-made quadcopters about the size of a dinner plate, capable of delivering a warhead weighing a kilogram or so.

Artificial intelligence researchers like me have been warning of the advent of such lethal autonomous weapons systems, which can make life-or-death decisions without human intervention, for years. A recent episode of 4 Corners reviewed this and many other risks posed by developments in AI.

Around 50 countries are meeting at the UN offices in Geneva this week in the latest attempt to hammer out a treaty to prevent the proliferation of these killer devices. History shows such treaties are needed, and that they can work.

The lesson of nuclear weapons

Scientists are pretty good at warning of the dangers facing the planet. Unfortunately, society is less good at paying attention.

Listen to ‘Don’t Call Me Resilient,’ a provocative new podcast about raceFind out more

In August 1945, the United States dropped atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing up to 200,000 civilians. Japan surrendered days later. The second world war was over, and the Cold War began.

Read more: World politics explainer: The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

The world still lives today under the threat of nuclear destruction. On a dozen or so occasions since then, we have come within minutes of all-out nuclear war.

Well before the first test of a nuclear bomb, many scientists working on the Manhattan Project were concerned about such a future. A secret petition was sent to President Harry S. Truman in July 1945. It accurately predicted the future:

The development of atomic power will provide the nations with new means of destruction. The atomic bombs at our disposal represent only the first step in this direction, and there is almost no limit to the destructive power which will become available in the course of their future development. Thus a nation which sets the precedent of using these newly liberated forces of nature for purposes of destruction may have to bear the responsibility of opening the door to an era of devastation on an unimaginable scale.

If after this war a situation is allowed to develop in the world which permits rival powers to be in uncontrolled possession of these new means of destruction, the cities of the United States as well as the cities of other nations will be in continuous danger of sudden annihilation. All the resources of the United States, moral and material, may have to be mobilized to prevent the advent of such a world situation …

Billions of dollars have since been spent on nuclear arsenals that maintain the threat of mutually assured destruction, the “continuous danger of sudden annihilation” that the physicists warned about in July 1945.

A warning to the world


Six years ago, thousands of my colleagues issued a similar warning about a new threat. Only this time, the petition wasn’t secret. The world wasn’t at war. And the technologies weren’t being developed in secret. Nevertheless, they pose a similar threat to global stability.

Read more: Open letter: we must stop killer robots before they are built

The threat comes this time from artificial intelligence, and in particular the development of lethal autonomous weapons: weapons that can identify, track and destroy targets without human intervention. The media often like to call them “killer robots”.

Our open letter to the UN carried a stark warning.



The key question for humanity today is whether to start a global AI arms race or to prevent it from starting. If any major military power pushes ahead with AI weapon development, a global arms race is virtually inevitable. The endpoint of such a technological trajectory is obvious: autonomous weapons will become the Kalashnikovs of tomorrow.

Read more: World's deadliest inventor: Mikhail Kalashnikov and his AK-47

Strategically, autonomous weapons are a military dream. They let a military scale its operations unhindered by manpower constraints. One programmer can command hundreds of autonomous weapons. An army can take on the riskiest of missions without endangering its own soldiers.
Nightmare swarms

There are many reasons, however, why the military’s dream of lethal autonomous weapons will turn into a nightmare. First and foremost, there is a strong moral argument against killer robots. We give up an essential part of our humanity if we hand to a machine the decision of whether a person should live or die.

Beyond the moral arguments, there are many technical and legal reasons to be concerned about killer robots. One of the strongest is that they will revolutionise warfare. Autonomous weapons will be weapons of immense destruction.

Previously, if you wanted to do harm, you had to have an army of soldiers to wage war. You had to persuade this army to follow your orders. You had to train them, feed them and pay them. Now just one programmer could control hundreds of weapons.


Organised swarms of drones can produce dazzling lightshows - but similar technology could make a cheap and devastating weapon.
Yomiuri Shimbun / AP

In some ways lethal autonomous weapons are even more troubling than nuclear weapons. To build a nuclear bomb requires considerable technical sophistication. You need the resources of a nation state, skilled physicists and engineers, and access to scarce raw materials such as uranium and plutonium. As a result, nuclear weapons have not proliferated greatly.

Autonomous weapons require none of this, and if produced they will likely become cheap and plentiful. They will be perfect weapons of terror.

Can you imagine how terrifying it will be to be chased by a swarm of autonomous drones? Can you imagine such drones in the hands of terrorists and rogue states with no qualms about turning them on civilians? They will be an ideal weapon with which to suppress a civilian population. Unlike humans, they will not hesitate to commit atrocities, even genocide.
Time for a treaty

We stand at a crossroads on this issue. It needs to be seen as morally unacceptable for machines to decide who lives and who dies. And for the diplomats at the UN to negotiate a treaty limiting their use, just as we have treaties to limit chemical, biological and other weapons. In this way, we may be able to save ourselves and our children from this terrible future.

Author
Toby Walsh

Professor of AI at UNSW, Research Group Leader, UNSW
Disclosure statement

Toby Walsh is a Laureate Fellow and Scientia Professor of Artificial Intelligence at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia. He is a Fellow of the Australian Academy of Science and author of the recent book, “2062: The World that AI Made” that explores the impact AI will have on society, including the impact on war.
Partners