Thursday, November 18, 2021

Leaked Audio: Amazon Workers Grill Managers at Anti-Union Meeting

"We are putting the company on our back 10 hours a day...They’re taking time away from our breaks. There is no voice here."


By Lauren Kaori Gurley
17.11.21
On the Clock

On the Clock is Motherboard's reporting on the organized labor movement, gig work, automation, and the future of work.

“We’re here to share facts, opinions, and experiences,” Ronald Edison, a senior operations manager at Amazon told warehouse workers in Staten Island in a mandatory anti-union meeting last week.

“[Amazon Labor Union] is a newly formed group that wants to represent workers at all four Staten Island campuses even though it has no experience,” he continued.

Last week, Amazon began holding mandatory anti-union meetings at JFK8, its largest New York City warehouse, and three neighboring warehouses, where workers recently filed and withdrew a petition for a union election in Staten Island. This particular meeting, which roughly 50 workers attended, turned contentious. Workers pushed back against management on what workers said were misleading talking points about unions, and spoke about grueling and dangerous working conditions that they believe a union can help improve.

Unionfacts.com (IS ANTI UNION)


Motherboard is publishing excerpts of the audio, recorded at what is known in the organized labor world as a “captive audience meeting,” to show how Amazon takes advantage of its direct access to workers to discredit union drives at the company. The recording has been cut down to 15 minutes and has been edited to protect sources. Across all sectors, these types of sessions have historically been very successful in scaring workers out of voting for a union. This is the first time audio from a captive audience meeting at Amazon has been published.

The recording is a direct look at the type of messaging that Amazon management is sending workers about unions, which is particularly notable because Amazon successfully thwarted a high stakes unionization effort in Bessemer, Alabama earlier this year. To date, no Amazon facilities in the United States have successfully unionized.

Amazon workers in Staten Island are unionizing with an independent union, known as Amazon Labor Union (ALU), that was formed by current and former employees earlier this year after the election in Bessemer.

“We continue to be a target for third-parties who do not understand our pro-employee philosophy and seek to disrupt the direct relationship between Amazon and our associates,” Edison, the operations manager, told workers at the outset of the meeting. “It would charge its members dues, fees, fines, and assessments in exchange for their representation.”

“Hey, you mind if I jump in real quick?” a worker, who self-identified as a leader of the union, said. “Now you said ‘third party.’ So the ALU is a third party? Allow me to correct you because I actually started the ALU. ALU is full of all Amazon associates. You say a ‘third party,’ but they’re all Amazon associates trying to form a union.”

Throughout the meeting, Amazon representatives repeatedly described the Amazon Labor Union as a “third party” that could take money from workers, a common argument made by companies to discredit unions and distract from the fact that many unions are made up of and led by workers.

“We regularly hold meetings with our employees as our focus remains on listening directly to them and continuously improving on their behalf,” Barbara Agrait, a spokesperson for Amazon told Motherboard. “It’s our employees’ choice whether or not to join a union. It always has been. And it’s important that everyone understands the facts about joining a union and the election process itself. We host regular information sessions for all employees, which includes an opportunity for them to ask questions. If the union vote passes, it will impact everyone at the site so it’s important all employees understand what that means for them and their day-to-day life working at Amazon.”

The November 11 meeting started as many captive audience meetings do, with the positives about working for Amazon. Edison and someone who introduced himself as an Amazon human resources employee who has worked at the company for 11 years, outlined a series of mechanisms at workers' disposal to raise concerns about their working conditions, including an internal comment board called “Voice of Amazon,” an opportunity to share workplace concerns on your birthday month called, “Birthday Roundtables,” as well as mechanisms for contacting the general manager of their warehouse, or even higher level managers beyond the warehouse.

“Birthday roundtables is another way we pull associates in during their birthday month. It’s your chance to get a nice treat, do a fun activity, but it’s also a communication time where we can talk about what’s going well, what are some opportunities, and what you want to see more of, and what can we do to create a great culture,” said Edison. (Promising to listen to workers’ concerns is a typical tactic of employers looking to convince workers that they don’t need a union.)

But the meeting quickly turned into a lecture about the Amazon Labor Union. “Let’s talk about Amazon and third parties,” Edison said. “We have an amazing workforce, and our direct relationship with associates like you has been a key factor to our ability to deliver the best possible services globally to our customers.”

Do you work for Amazon and have a tip to share? Please get in touch with the reporter Lauren Gurley, via email, lauren.gurley@vice.com or on Signal 201-897-2109.

“You may be approached by an ALU representative or an associate wearing a vest who could ask you to sign something,” the Amazon human resource representative said. “That’s perfectly fine. They’re legally allowed to do that but just make sure you’re reading the fine print of what that authorization card is implying. By signing you could be authorizing the ALU to speak on your behalf or you could be obligated to pay union dues so just make sure you read everything closely.

This statement is false. While collecting signed union cards from employees is what allows the National Labor Relations Board to determine whether there is enough support from workers for a union to qualify for an election, it does not give unions the right to extract union dues from workers. Workers are only legally required to pay union dues in New York if and once a majority of their workforce votes to join a union and a contract is ratified.

“Not to call you guys out,” one worker at the meeting said. “But you guys are always open and honest with us? I find that very false especially during COVID? I mean come on man, people get COVID here everyday.”

Last month Amazon Labor Union filed for a union election at four Staten Island facilities, submitting more than 2,000 union authorization cards with the National Labor Relations Board. But last week, Amazon Labor Union withdrew their petition for the election because they didn’t get enough signatures to qualify for a union election. (Typically a union needs authorization cards signed by a third of a company’s workers to qualify for a union election.)

In a tweet, the union blamed the situation on Amazon’s high turnover and firing union organizers and said they planned “replace those few cards and resubmit shortly.”

If Amazon workers in Staten Island vote to unionize they’d be the first to do so in the United States at the vehemently anti-union company, which is on track to become the largest employer in the country within the next year or two.

For decades, mandatory anti-union meetings have been a common tactic employers use to crush support for union drives. In fact, 89 percent of employers use captive audience meetings during union drives, according to the Economic Policy Institute. Employers typically present these meetings as “educational,” lay out anti-union arguments as fact, and spread fear among workers by focusing on what they could potentially lose by joining a union.

Under current labor law, employers can fire and retaliate against employees who refuse to attend captive audience meetings, but a bill known as the Protect the Right to Organize (PRO) Act, which passed the House of Representatives and parts of which are included in President Biden’s Build Back Better Act, would attempt to level the playing field by prohibiting employers from mandating workers to attend captive audience meetings.

“We continue to be a target for third-parties who do not understand our pro-employee philosophy and seek to disrupt the direct relationship between Amazon and our associates.”

Over the past six months, Amazon employees who formed Amazon Labor Union have set up a tent outside of JFK8, where workers can sign union authorization cards. The union has also provided hotdogs, hamburgers, and mac and cheese for workers at these events, and in recent days, has been giving out free marijuana.

During the meeting, Amazon suggested that these barbecues are intended to deceive workers into signing union cards.

“The ALU can say or promise anything. It’s important to read closely anything the ALU gives you to sign,” the Amazon human resources said. “They may tell you it’s for free food or other things, but you may be giving up your voice and you may be obligated to dues ...If you’re being promised something—more pay, better benefits, a voice, whatever that may be—the thing I’d challenge is a ‘promise’ versus a ‘guarantee,’ and in legal terms, they mean two completely different things. So if you’re being promised something, ask for that in writing and see if the ALU can give you that in writing.”

It is true that unions cannot guarantee raises, benefits, or perks to workers who vote to unionize, because these terms are negotiated in a contract at a bargaining table with management once a union is formed. But statistics show that on average workers who are part of unions earn 11.2 percent more than their non-union counterparts in the same industries, and are significantly more likely to be covered by employer-paid health insurance, according to the Economic Policy Institute. Data shows that Black and Latinx employees are paid 13.7 percent and 20.1 percent more than their non union counterparts, respectively.

“If you don’t want a union, you have to start treating people better instead of turning them over at a rate that’s just insane.”Unionfacts.orgunionfacts.com

Following the information session at JFK8, the Amazon representatives leading the meeting opened up the floor for questions—and workers challenged the session’s leaders intentions, and brought up workplace concerns.

“What state are you all from? Where ya’ll from?” one worker asked. “Seriously, I’m asking you.”

“Indiana area,” one of the representatives said.

“Chicago area,” another representative said.

“Connecticut,” another representative said.

“Okay so you guys aren’t from New York,” the worker said. “They are flying you out here from Indiana, Connecticut and all that. Got ya’ll staying in hotels, paying y’all’s bread and we are putting the company on our back 10 hours a day, 11 hours a day. They’re taking time away from our breaks. There is no voice here,” the same worker said earlier.

“So the union [negotiates] for your salary, respect, seniority, your retirement?” another worker asked the meeting’s leaders.

“What I’ll say to that is the fact is that nothing is guaranteed,” the human resources representative said. “Your health benefits and the premiums you pay could be more, they could be the same, or they could be less.”

“See you’re dodging it,” another worker interrupted, raising his voice. “A lot of [members] get better benefits when they join a union. That’s the whole point of this. Why would Amazon workers decide to form a union if Amazon was doing everything they wanted it to do?”

The representatives attempted to cut the worker off, but the worker continued, “No, I’m going to talk….You mentioned all these [mechanisms] that workers have to speak out. And what has Amazon done? Nothing. I’ve been at Amazon for six years, bro. What are we talking about here? The issues that were occurring in 2015 are occurring now. So you talk about using your voice? There has been no change at all. The same amount of personal time. The same amount of vacation time. The same amount of [unpaid time off]. People get fired left and right. People get sick. Amazon didn’t even want to tell nobody about COVID. What are we talking about?”

“You can leave if you like. Don’t get mad at me,” the human resources representative said.

Another worker then spoke up. “I’ve been here three years and I only make $21.50,” he said. “After that three years, they got no incentives for anybody. This is not a long term job and you treat it like that when you turn people out so quickly. Your turnover rate is like 120 percent and that was in The New York Times, and you guys turn over people so much that you’re literally running out of people to hire because no one wants to stay here for long because you’re not making it an environment that people want to stay here and work for years at a time.”

(The New York Times reported in June that prior to the pandemic turnover at Amazon was roughly 3 percent a week, or 150 percent a year.)

“If you don’t want a union, you have to start treating people better instead of turning them over at a rate that’s just insane,” the worker continued. “I work with a 60-year-old woman. Don’t get me wrong. She busts her ass here. She puts in work. This workload is not easy. But what happens when she’s 62 and has terrible back issues because she’s been working a 10-hour day for three years? Are you guys going to pay her medical bills? No, because the second she can’t meet ‘rate’ or doesn’t work for the company, she doesn’t exist for you guys. There’s no medical care after you stop working here even though people sacrifice their legs and their backs. How many people here have gotten terrible injuries from working here? Back issues. Knee issues. They’re coming in for braces all the time, and you guys make all that stuff so incredibly hard. A friend of mine just recently, while she was here, pulled a muscle in her hand, went to a doctor and went to Amazon. They said ‘oh, it’s not that big of a deal’ and she went back to work. Turns out she tore ligaments in her hand but Amazon was like ‘oh, you can go back to work.’”

(“Rate” is the productivity quota that Amazon sets for its warehouse workers.)

The human resources representative said he could not comment on the specific situation “because of HIPAA laws.”

“You guys always hide behind the loopholes,” the worker retorted. “You guys work in a complete grey area.”

Another worker chimed in about recently being in the hospital for nine days with COVID-19, and having lost two close family members to COVID-19 last year, noting that “nothing has changed” at the facility.

“Extremely sorry for your loss,” the human resource representative said.

The worker also noted it was “ridiculous” that Amazon sometimes didn’t notify workers for up to a week when they had been exposed to someone who contracted the virus.

After 29 minutes, the meeting’s leaders abruptly brought the meeting to a close while workers continued to express their anger over working conditions at the facility and talk over the meeting’s leaders.

It is unclear whether Amazon will continue to hold captive audience meetings now that the petition has been withdrawn but the company has spent months spreading anti-union messages, including in fliers on bathroom stalls, text messages, and on TV displays visible to workers at the Staten Island facilities. In August, Motherboard reported that the National Labor Relations Board found that Amazon illegally confiscated union literature from the Amazon Labor Union.

Amazon workers in Bessemer, Alabama, are also organizing toward a second union election this year, after the National Labor Relations found that Amazon had interfered so thoroughly with election proceedings earlier this year to scrap the initial results for the defeated union election in April. Amazon warehouse workers in Alabama, too, have been forced to sit through captive audience meetings.

NDP leader says his party can help Nunavut in a minority government

‘We’re hoping we can use our leverage to force this government to do more,’ says Jagmeet Singh

 POLITICS  NOV 17, 2021 

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh stands in front of a wall in the Nunatta Sunakkutaangit museum. Singh is in Iqaluit to push the federal government to spend $180 million to overhaul Iqaluit’s water infastructure. (Photo by David Lochead)

By David Lochead

NDP federal leader Jagmeet Singh is in Iqaluit this week pushing for the federal government to spend $180 million to address the city’s water emergency.

He’s also meeting with local leaders to discuss territorial issues like climate change and housing, and attend the NDP riding association’s annual general meeting.

Singh sat down with Nunatsiaq News during his visit to discuss his plan for helping MP Lori Idlout represent Nunavut.

This interview was edited for length and clarity.

Nunatsiaq News: How are you going to make new Nunavut NDP MP Lori Idlout feel comfortable in Parliament after the former Inuk and NDP MP Mumilaaq Qaqqaq said she did not feel like she belonged?

Singh: This is a House of Commons and parliamentary problem that has impacted lots of Indigenous and racialized people. I’m going to provide all the support I can. But one of the problems that is consistently raised is that when the institution does not fix the problem that it created, then that institution is sending a message that the people impacted do not belong. It is not enough for the Liberals to express concern. They’ve got the power to fix the problems, and when they do not it sends a message that the people impacted do not belong.

NN: Nunavut is a large territory and that brings its own challenges. How will you assist Idlout with the task of representing such a geographically spread-out riding?

Singh: We have other MPs that represent large ridings so they will be giving Lori support on how it can be done and how we can ensure resources get to communities. When you’ve got such a large [riding] as Lori does the House of Commons should provide additional support so MPs like Lori can provide the necessary resources to the communities she represents.

As well, I’ve come to Iqaluit is to assist Lori and to support a [riding] that has often been ignored. In the future, I plan to return to Nunavut and do a tour of the smaller communities.

NN: When would you plan to come back and visit the other communities?

Singh: It’s tentative but we’re planning for the spring or summer.

NN: Any idea what communities you would go to?

Singh: Not yet. Lori is excited about the idea and agrees that Nunavut gets ignored. I want to go to the smaller communities where people don’t often get an elected official coming to where they live.

NN: If the amount of seats in the House of Commons does expand should Nunavut become two ridings instead of one?

Singh: That’s something where I would talk with Lori and talk with Nunavummiut about and figure out what best meets their needs.

NN: How will Nunavummiut benefit from this minority government getting propped up?

Singh: The benefit is that when we have seen changes for the good in this country they have happened because of minority governments. A lot of things we’re proud of, like our universal health-care system and old age pension, happened in a minority government.

In this pandemic we were able to push a minority government to give more significant benefits to people: we increased CERB, we increased the wage subsidy, we got a paid sick leave program and we helped students in university not covered by CERB. We were able to bring in four major victories that made people’s lives better.

A minority government means the Liberals are going to need another party to get legislation passed. We’re hoping we can use our leverage to force this government to do more.

P.J. Akeeagok will be Nunavut’s new premier

Former QIA president defeats incumbent Joe Savikataaq and Health Minister Lorne Kusugak

 POLITICS  NOV 17, 2021 – 

P.J. Akeeagok won a three-way race to become Nunavut’s next premier, defeating incumbent Joe Savikataaq and Health Minister Lorne Kusugak on Wednesday. (Photo by Mélanie Ritchot)

By  Mélanie Ritchot

P.J Akeeagok has been named Nunavut’s new premier-elect after a three-way race on Wednesday.

“I’m very honoured,” he said, and then thanked his family, elders, and constituents after he was elected.

“I know there’s so much work to be done but I think we’re ready to pull up our sleeves and get to work.”

Akeeagok — a first-time MLA — and Health Minister Lorne Kusugak challenged the current premier, Joe Savikataaq, and spent the day trying to win MLAs’ votes on Wednesday.

The race was settled by secret ballots cast by the MLAs elected to the sixth legislative assembly by Nunavummiut.

Before MLAs voted, each nominee made a speech and answered questions from other members.

Hot topics included in-territory elder care, job creation through mining and decentralizing the Government of Nunavut, and housing.

Mental health resources and suicide prevention were also recurring topics brought up in MLAs’ questions.

Akeeagok referenced the Iqaluit high school students who walked into the lobby of the legislature on Tuesday to demand more resources.

“I want every one of them to know we heard you loud and clear,” he said, addressing the youth.

He compared the severity of suicide rates in Nunavut to the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Governments were able to mobilize very quickly, they were able to provide support to ensure safety,” he said about the pandemic response. The response to suicide needs to be similar, he said.

“I will do everything in my power to bring tangible solutions to the issue.”

Akeeagok was the president of the Qikiqtani Inuit Association for seven years until resigning to run in Nunavut’s Oct. 25 general election.

This experience came up when the nominees for premier debated how the Government of Nunavut should work with Inuit organizations to tackle issues, like the housing crisis, more effectively in the territory.

With Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., having recently passed a resolution to seek Inuit self government, and stating the GN has failed Inuit, Akeeagok said he’s looking forward to meeting with NTI executives soon, in an interview after he was elected.

“To really come openly and really listen in terms of where we could collaborate,” he said.

Akeeagok said two of his top priorities if elected would be addressing the housing shortage and elder care needs.

Throughout the candidate debate, Savikataaq relied on his track record and said his strength is being fair to all Nunavummiut and listening to all sides of issues.

He said giving him a second term would allow for consistency through the changing government.

“I’ve done the job, I’ve been doing the job,” Savikataaq said.

“There is no learning curve.”

Health Minister Kusugak spoke about the need for the next government to be proactive multiple times.

“This government has to stop being a reactionary government on very important issues such as child abuse, suicide, and other crimes to our women and children,” he said.

When the topic of decentralizing the GN to create jobs in small communities came up, Kusugak also suggested more remote jobs be made available to bring remote Nunavummiut into the workforce without needing to build local offices.

Tony Akoak, the MLA for Gjoa Haven, was elected as Speaker of the house at the beginning of Wednesday’s leadership forum.

On Wednesday evening, eight ministers will be chosen from the group of MLAs, also voted-in by their peers by secret ballot.

The premier-elect will assign ministers their portfolios in the coming days.

After the premier was chosen, the MLAs voted for the eight members who will form the cabinet.

They nominated 16 of their peers, including six newcomers, to become ministers, forcing more voting to narrow the field to eight.

Seven ministers were voted in on first ballots.

After MLAs picked Akeeagok to be premier, they voted for the eight MLAs who will form the cabinet.

MLAs nominated 16 of their peers, including six newcomers to cabinet, to be ministers.

Seven ministers were voted-in on the first ballots.

But four more ballots were needed to narrow down who got the last seat in cabinet, with Aggu’s MLA Joanna Quassa, breaking the stalemate.

The fifth ballot came down to Solomon Malliki Joanna Quassa, Premier Savikataaq.

Nunavut’s eight incoming cabinet ministers are:

  • Adam Arreak Lightstone
  • David Akeeagok
  • Pamela Gross
  • Lorne Kusugak
  • John Main
  • David Joanasie
  • Margaret Nakashuk
  • Joanna Quassa

Pamela Gross, the MLA for Cambridge Bay, and Aggu’s Joanna Quassa, are the only first-time MLAs in the cabinet and are among the four women chosen for ministerial positions.

It’s up to Akeeagok, as premier-elect, to assign ministers their portfolios in the coming days. MLAs will be officially sworn-in to their roles on Friday.

 

Former nuclear reactor space in Saskatoon gets the all-clear

SLOWPOKE-2 nuclear research reactor was used for doing neutron activation analysis to determine elemental concentrations for various industries. 
Saskatchewan Research Council / Supplied

The Saskatchewan Research Council (SRC) says its nuclear research reactor in Saskatoon has been safely decommissioned and the space could now be used for regular office use.

The Safe Low-Power Kritical Experiment (SLOWPOKE-2) reactor was commissioned in March 1981.

READ MORE: Saskatchewan eyes small nuclear reactor advancements with 3 other provinces

Officials said the multi-year transition involved defuelling the reactor and transporting the shoebox-sized uranium core to the United States.

“SLOWPOKE-2 leaves a strong legacy in Saskatchewan and proves, now more than ever, that nuclear is safe, reliable and sustainable,” Minister Responsible for SRC Jeremy Harrison said in a press release on Wednesday.

“This is another example of SRC demonstrating leadership and expertise.”

SLOWPOKE-2 was used for doing neutron activation analysis to determine uranium and other elemental concentrations for various industries. Throughout its lifespan, the reactor conducted nearly 240,000 analytical tests.

Click to play video: 'Experts weigh in on possibility of nuclear energy in Saskatchewan'Experts weigh in on possibility of nuclear energy in Saskatchewan
Experts weigh in on possibility of nuclear energy in Saskatchewan – Feb 18, 2021

Officials said, over the past years, testing had decreased and newer technologies were adopted at SRC’s facility in Saskatoon.

“SRC is incredibly proud of the role our SLOWPOKE-2 played in adding value to the province by performing analytical testing for industry for the past 38 years,” SRC president and CEO Mike Crabtree said in a statement.

“This hands-on experience with the SLOWPOKE-2 can be applied to emerging nuclear technology, such as small modular reactors, as we consider how to power our future.”

The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission has officially deemed the decommissioning complete, according to officials.

 

The impact of flowering plants on the evolution of life on Earth

The impact of flowering plants on the evolution of life on Earth
The evolution of modern plants and animals, showing how the rise of angiosperms through
 the past 200 million years was accompanied by massive expansion in biodiversity of
 numerous key groups of insects (such as bees, wasps, butterflies, bugs, beetles, and flies)
. The key mass extinctions are marked in red, but the key phase was from 100 to 50 million
 years ago, which we term the Angiosperm Terrestrial Revolution.
 Credit: Mike Benton and New Phytologist Trust.

Researchers at the University of Bristol have identified the huge impact of flowering plants on the evolution of life on Earth

Flowering plants today include most of the plants humans eat or drink, such as grains, fruits and vegetables, and they build many familiar landscapes such as wetlands, meadows, and forests. From 100 to 50 million years ago, the flowering plants dramatically boosted Earth's biodiversity and rebuilt entire ecosystems.

Paleontologist Prof Michael J. Benton from Bristol's School of Earth Sciences teamed up with Prof Peter Wilf, a palaeobotanist from Pennsylvania State University, U.S., and Dr. Hervé Sauquet, an expert on flower evolution from the Royal Botanic Garden Sydney, Australia.

In their new paper, the team reviewed the way in which angiosperms rebuilt forests and other habitats on land, and how this contributed to modern biodiversity.

"Flowering plants might have been around for some time, but they began to appear more commonly in the Cretaceous, in the last 70 million years of the age of dinosaurs," said Prof Benton. "But it seems that dinosaurs didn't choose to eat them, and continued chomping ferns and conifers such as pines. However, it was only after the dinosaurs had gone that angiosperms really took off on evolutionary terms."

The impact of flowering plants on the evolution of life on Earth
A gymnosperm, Ginkgo yimaensis, reconstructed from fossil evidence. Credit: Rebecca Horwitt

"The Angiosperm Terrestrial Revolution, as we call it, marked a huge change in ecosystems and biodiversity on land," said Prof Wilf. "More than a million species of modern insects owe their livelihoods to angiosperms, as pollinators such as bees and wasps, as leaf-eaters such as beetles, locusts and bugs, or feeding on nectar such as butterflies. And these insects are eaten by spiders, lizards, birds and mammals. After the dinosaur extinction, the great tropical rainforests began to flourish, and angiosperms began to dominate life on land."

"Angiosperms owe their success to a whole series of special features," said Dr. Sauquet. "Biology students all know that the  flower was an amazing innovation, with special colors and adaptations to make sure particular insects pollinate them successfully. But angiosperms also drive the evolution of the animals that pollinate them, mainly insects, and they can build complex forest structures which are homes to thousands of species. They can also capture much more of the Sun's energy than conifers and their relatives, and this extra energy passes through the whole ecosystem."

Prof Wilf explained: "Although angiosperms first appeared and then became very diverse during the age of dinosaurs, it was only after dinosaurs disappeared 66 million years ago that flowering plants really made big changes and restructured the world's ecosystems.

"It is even possible that the removal of the dinosaurs and their constant trampling and disturbance was the trigger for these events. Today, two-thirds of all species of plants and animals live in rainforests."

The impact of flowering plants on the evolution of life on Earth
Early angiosperm, Archaefructus sinensis reconstructed from fossil evidence. Credit: Rebecca Horwitt

"A typical angiosperm-dominated rainforest may contain hundreds of species of , as well as hundreds of species of other plants like ferns and mosses, and thousands of species of fungi, insects, spiders, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals," added Dr. Sauquet. "On the other hand, conifer forests, based around the pine family, for example, contain fewer species of other plants or animals, and they probably were never as species-rich."

"The big change happened in the Cretaceous, when angiosperms with their amazing flowers gradually took over, step by step," continued Prof Benton. "Cretaceous forests and open spaces probably contained far fewer species. So, when the  died out, modern groups of animals could fill their places, but it seems they did much more than just replace them like-for-like. The angiosperms became hugely diverse themselves, but they also created enormous numbers of niches for other  and animals, so you get tens more  on each hectare of the Earth's surface than you would if angiosperms had not become established when they did."Dinosaur-age fossils provide new insights into origin of flowering plants

More information: Michael J. Benton et al, The Angiosperm Terrestrial Revolution and the origins of modern biodiversity, New Phytologist (2021). DOI: 10.1111/nph.1782

Journal information: New Phytologist 

Provided by University of Bristol 

Finally, a Practical Use for Nuclear Fusion

Researchers used the roiling temperatures of an experimental fusion reactor for a surprising purpose: testing heat shield materials for spacecraft.



Inside a tokamak, like this EAST at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, powerful magnets are used to hold whirling plasma at a high pressure, enabling it to reach the tens of millions of degrees required for atoms to fuse together and release energy.
PHOTOGRAPH: LIU JUNXI/XINHUA/GETTY IMAGES

ON DECEMBER 7, 1995, a NASA probe entered Jupiter’s atmosphere and immediately started to burn. It had been hatched six months earlier by the orbiting Galileo mission, and now, 80 million miles later, it was ready to sample the thick layers of hydrogen and helium surrounding the solar system’s largest planet.

The spacecraft, called the Jupiter Atmospheric Probe, had been carefully designed to withstand the soaring temperatures it would encounter on contact with Jovian air. It had a huge carbon-based heat shield, comprising about 50 percent of the probe’s total weight, which had been designed to dissipate heat by wearing away as the probe descended. This controlled process, called ablation, had been carefully modeled back on Earth—NASA had even built a special test lab called the Giant Planet Facility in an attempt to re-create the conditions and test the design.

As the probe descended through the clouds at more than 100,000 mph, friction heated the air around it to more than 28,000 degrees Fahrenheit—splitting atoms into charged particles and creating an electric soup known as plasma. Plasma accounts for natural phenomena like lightning or the aurora; the sun is a giant burning ball of it. It is often referred to as the fourth state of matter, but really it’s the first: In the moments after the Big Bang, plasma was all there was.

The plasma ate through the Jupiter probe’s heat shield much faster than anyone at NASA had predicted. When the agency’s engineers analyzed the data from sensors embedded in the heat shield, they realized that their careful models had been way off the mark. The shield disintegrated much more than expected in some areas, and much less in others. The probe barely survived, and the only reason it did was that they had built a margin for error into the design by making it extra thick. “This was left as an open question,” says Eva Kostadinova, an expert on plasma from Auburn University. “But if you want to design new missions, you have to be able to model what’s going on.”

After the Galileo mission, scientists used the data from the probe to tweak their models of ablation, but they still faced a big problem: It’s very difficult to precisely re-create the conditions of a high-speed entry to a dense atmosphere, so it’s hard to test those models for accuracy. That also poses a barrier for new heat shield materials that could be lighter or better than the carbon-based ones used right now. If you can’t test them, it’s very hard to be confident they’ll work when attached to a billion-dollar spacecraft.

Past testing efforts have used lasers, plasma jets, and high-speed projectiles to simulate the heat of entry, but none of them are quite right. “No aerospace facility on Earth can reach the high heating conditions that you experience during atmospheric entry into something like Jupiter,” says Kostadinova.

Now, new research by Kostadinova and collaborator Dmitri Orlov from UC San Diego has demonstrated a potential alternative—the fiery innards of an experimental nuclear fusion reactor.

There are a few hundred such reactors, known as tokamaks, in state-funded research facilities around the world, including the Joint European Torus in the United Kingdom, and ITER, the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, a 35-nation collaboration in southern France. For decades, researchers have been using them to grapple with the challenges of nuclear fusion, a potentially revolutionary technology that could provide essentially unlimited power. Inside a tokamak, powerful magnets are used to hold whirling plasma at a high pressure, enabling it to reach the tens of millions of degrees required for atoms to fuse together and release energy. Cynics argue that nuclear fusion is doomed to forever remain the energy source of the future—right now, fusion experiments still consume more electricity than they generate.

But Kostadinova and her collaborator Dmitri Orlov were more interested in the plasma inside these reactors, which they realized could be the perfect environment to simulate a spacecraft entering the atmosphere of a gas giant. Orlov works on the DIII-D fusion reactor, an experimental tokamak at a US Department of Energy facility in San Diego, but his background is in aerospace engineering.

Together, they used the DIII-D facilities to run a series of experiments on ablation. Using a port at the bottom of the tokamak, they inserted a series of carbon rods into the plasma flow, and used high-speed and infrared cameras and spectrometers to track how they disintegrated. Orlov and Kostadinova also fired minuscule carbon pellets into the reactor at high speed, mimicking on a small scale what the heat shield on the Galileo probe would have encountered in Jupiter’s atmosphere.

The conditions inside the tokamak were remarkably similar in terms of the temperature of the plasma, the speed it flowed over the material, and even its composition: The Jovian atmosphere is mostly hydrogen and helium, the DIII-D tokamak uses deuterium, which is an isotope of hydrogen. “Instead of launching something at a very high velocity, we instead put a stationary object into a very fast flow,” Orlov says.

The experiments, which were presented at a meeting of the American Physical Society in Pittsburgh this month, helped to validate the models of ablation that were developed by NASA scientists using data sent back from the Galileo probe. But they also serve as a proof of concept for a new type of testing. “We’re opening this new field of research,” says Orlov. “Nobody has done it before.”

It’s something that’s sorely needed in the industry. “There’s been a lag in new testing procedures,” says Yanni Barghouty, founder of Cosmic Shielding Corporation, a startup building radiation shields for spacecraft. “It allows you to prototype a lot faster and more cheaply—there’s a feedback loop.”

Whether nuclear fusion reactors will be a practical testing ground remains to be seen—they’re incredibly sensitive devices that have been designed for another purpose entirely. Orlov and Kostadinov were given time at DIII-D as part of a special effort to use the reactor to expand scientific knowledge, utilizing a port built into the tokamak for the purpose of safely testing new materials. But it’s an expensive process. Their day on the machine cost half a million dollars. As a result, this kind of experiment will likely be done sparingly in the future, when the opportunity arises, to tweak and improve computer simulations.

With further experiments, Orlov and Kostadinova hope that the models can be improved and used to optimize heat shield design for future missions—putting more material where it’s needed, but also removing it from where it’s not. NASA’s DAVINCI+ mission, scheduled to launch toward Venus near the end of the decade, could be the first to take advantage. It comprises an orbiter and a descent probe, which will need powerful shielding as it falls through the hot, thick Venusian atmosphere. The Galileo probe taught scientists much about the formation of the solar system, but with a better heat shield, it could have done much more. “Half of the payload is something that’s just going to burn,” says Kostadinova. “You’re limiting the number of scientific instruments you can really fit in.”

Beyond that, the technique could be used to test new materials, such as silicon carbide, or new forms of heat shield that use a mixture of passive materials that ablate and other components that don’t. Engineers will need those for future missions—the Galileo probe took the slowest, flattest trajectory possible to limit ablation, and still stretched the limits of what was then possible.

The research could also help in the design of fusion reactors themselves. Until now, most research has understandably focused on the core plasma reactions inside a tokamak. But as nuclear fusion inches toward commercialization, more attention will need to be paid to the construction of the reactors and the design of materials that can contain the fusion reaction and safely dissipate the energy if things go wrong.

Kostadinova and Orlov are calling for more collaboration between the fusion and space research communities, which both have an interest in understanding plasma reactions—and in developing substances that can contain them. “The future is to make better materials, and new materials,” Kostadinova says.