COP15 outcome is an imperfect game-changer for saving nature. Here's why Australia did us proud

by Sarah Bekessy et al, The Conversation

Credit: Anissa Terry/Unsplash, CC BY

Billed as the event that'll determine the fate of the entire living world, the United Nations' COP15 nature summit has wrapped up in Canada with a historic deal, which includes protecting roughly a third of nature by 2030.

The planet is entering its sixth mass extinction event, and new evidence suggests the crisis is twice as bad as scientists previously thought. The new global agreement—called the Kunming-Montreal Global biodiversity framework—saw 196 delegations commit to 23 targets to stem this tide of extinction. Its aim is to pave the way for humanity and nature to live in harmony by 2050.

The framework is a game-changer for global biodiversity, but it isn't perfect. There remains a few sticking points—primarily regarding funding and firm targets—and not all world leaders are pleased with the outcome.

Australia is a global leader in wildlife extinctions, so has a special part to play in the negotiations. In a refreshing departure from some previous efforts at COP meetings, Australians can be proud of our representation at this one, arguing for strong targets and promising to host an international nature summit in 2024.

Bringing down the gavel

After four years of negotiations, including two years of delay due to COVID, the framework was adopted at 3:30am Montreal time. Controversially, the deal was declared despite objections from some wildlife-rich African countries.

In particular, a representative from the Democratic Republic of Congo said the nation couldn't support the agreement. They argued that a separate fund should be developed from rich countries to support poorer ones to protect their biodiversity.

Australia has a lot on the line at these summits. Like Congo, Australia is one of 17 "megadiverse" countries, which together account for over 70% of Earth's biodiversity. Yet, we lead the world in mammal extinctions and 19 of our most important ecosystems, such as the Great Barrier Reef, are collapsing.

We're pleased to see that Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek championed many critical inclusions of the agreement, including:

• "30x30": 30% of land, freshwater and oceans protected by 2030

• a strong species extinction target, which is to ensure "urgent management" to "halt human-induced extinction" and to recover threatened species

• including targets to restore degraded lands

• stronger regulation and targets for plastics and plastic pollution

• requiring companies to disclose how they depend upon and impact biodiversity

• including targets for nature-based solutions to protect against extreme events and climate change, such as restoring mangroves

• including a reference in the deal to the circular economy, which emphasizes reusing materials to produce the things we consume

Some of these aspirations were included in the final agreement, most notably including the 30% protection target and targets for restoring degraded lands.

Some were watered down, including the timing of the goal to achieve zero new species extinctions (delaying its achievement until 2050) and relying on generic language of "urgent management action."

Some, such as language on the "circular economy," didn't make it in. And explicit targets were removed from earlier drafts regarding the regulation of plastics and pollution, instead replaced with generic language of "prevent" and "reduce."

Many positives to celebrate

Hugely important is the target to protect and conserve 30% of the planet. This will focus on areas rich in biodiversity, such as the grasslands of the Victorian volcanic plain, and ensure these areas are well connected and representative of different habitats.

But while declaring new protected areas is critical, declaration alone is insufficient.

To be effective, protected areas need strong investment and active conservation management of, for example, invasive species and climate change. Many of Australia's protected areas, including national parks, are heavily impacted by deer, rabbits, goats, foxes and feral cats and more.

Another important part of the agreement is to see at least 30% of degraded inland water and coastal and marine ecosystems under effective restoration by 2030. This is in addition to increasing protected areas to be 30% of the planet.

We were also happy to see over a thousand businesses present at COP15, from IKEA to H&M Group to Unilever. More than 330 business leaders called for a strong final agreement, including the requirement for businesses to disclose how their operations impact and depend upon nature.

This is a significant turnaround from previous COPs, and has been hailed by Eva Zabey, from global coalition Business for Nature, as helping "reset the rules of our economic and financial systems."

Unfortunately, the final text of the agreement removed targets to halve business impacts on biodiversity, and disclosure of impacts is only required for large and transnational companies.

The role and rights of Indigenous peoples and local communities was highlighted in the agreement, recognizing the value of Indigenous territories and Indigenous-led conservation models. Indigenous land contains an estimated 80% of global biodiversity, yet Indigenous people comprise less than 5% of the world's population.

Going forward, it's crucial to ensure these rights are respected in implementing targets such as 30x30.

Given the important role of Indigenous Protected Areas in the makeup of Australia's network of protected areas, properly resourcing and supporting these places and communities will be critical for Australia to meet its biodiversity targets.

Some negatives to lament

COP15 saw a strong push for more funding to flow from wealthy countries to support developing countries to protect and recover their biodiversity. But representatives from Latin American, Africa and South East Asia walked out of meetings last week in protest that they weren't being heard.

The eventual agreement was for US$30 billion per year to flow from wealthy to poorer countries by 2030. But these commitments are not legally binding and detail is yet to be negotiated.

The biggest disappointment in the new Global Biodiversity Framework is the slow pace of key targets. For example, Australia has now committed to prevent any further human-caused extinctions by 2030—an aspiration the rest of the world should have formally adopted.

We can't wait until 2050. 28 years of more species loss will leave the diversity of life depleted, undermining our environments, food systems, culture and way of life.

In the original text drafted ahead of the summit, there was explicit reference to achieving a "nature positive world" by 2030. "Nature positive" refers to world where nature is regenerating rather than depleting.

But this framing didn't make it into the final agreement, and will need to be progressed in other ways.

How can Australia do better?

Australia was less vocal on how the 70% of land outside global protected areas is to be managed, and on ensuring sustainable consumption.

These are areas requiring stronger ambition and leadership, given so many native, threatened species depend private land. Indeed, habitat loss is a prevailing driver of extinction in Australia.

An estimated A$2 billion of targeted threatened species recovery funding is needed each year to avoid extinctions and recover Australia's threatened plants and animals.

But Australia has been criticized for the lack of funding committed to biodiversity and threatened species recovery, compared to less biodiverse countries such as Germany and France.

Time for action

Ultimately, there is plenty to be hopeful about. Biodiversity has never been so high on the agenda of political and business leaders worldwide. We now have a new global commitment to "halt and reverse" the extinction crisis with some tangible targets that the 196 signatories must respond to.

With this crucial agreement in place, governments, businesses and communities must now figure out how to put the agreement into practice.

But time is of the essence. If we let our planet sink into the depths of the sixth mass extinction, generations to come will not see the end of it. It will take tens of millions of years to recover.

Governments have consistently failed to meet targets set for nature in previous global meetings. So we must now develop mechanisms to hold governments accountable and to collectively undertake the serious work ahead, to ensure we protect and recover our biodiversity.

Provided by The Conversation 

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Things to know about a landmark biodiversity agreement

 

Searching for life on alien worlds

by Felix Würsten, ETH Zurich

Artist's impression of the Extremely Large Telescope (ELT), which is currently under

 construction in Chile's Atacama Desert. Credit: ESO/L. Calçada, CC BY 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Twenty-seven years ago, at the University of Geneva, Michel Mayor and Didier Queloz—now a professor at ETH—discovered the first extrasolar planet orbiting a sun-like star. Much has happened since that initial discovery: astronomers have now identified more than 5,000 exoplanets, many of a similar size to Earth, in over 3,700 different planetary systems. With only a tiny portion of the universe analyzed so far, it certainly seems plausible to suggest that life might exist on other planets outside our solar system.

Yet, as any scientist will tell you, a plausible hypothesis is not the same as proof. This has led many researchers to wonder how we might be able to demonstrate the existence of life beyond our solar system. One promising approach is to analyze the atmosphere of exoplanets. By studying the absorption lines in a host star's optical spectrum, scientists can determine which molecules are present in an exoplanet's atmosphere, at least in the case of larger planets.

As well as hunting for signs of methane, carbon dioxide, oxygen or water vapor, they are also interested in identifying the combinations in which these substances occur. "Both methane and oxygen are present in the Earth's atmosphere," says Sascha Quanz, Professor of Exoplanets and Habitability at ETH Zurich. "This is a chemical disequilibrium that wouldn't exist without living organisms." In other words, life must have caused this imbalance. The discovery of such a disequilibrium in the atmosphere of an Earth-like exoplanet would be a strong indicator of the presence of life.

Ideally, of course, it would be better if we could capture direct images of exoplanets rather than observing them indirectly as they pass in front of their host star. This is easier said than done, however, because exoplanets are almost completely hidden by the glare of their parent stars. To tackle this problem, Quanz has teamed up with other researchers to develop an instrument for the Extremely Large Telescope (ELT).

Construction of the ELT in Chile's Atacama Desert is currently underway and once operational, the telescope's 39-meter mirror will massively enhance the ability of astronomers to peer deeper into space. "With the ELT, we'll then be able for the first time to capture direct images of an Earth-like planet orbiting a nearby star, because this new instrument will block out the light of that star," says Quanz.

One surprise after another

But where should researchers direct the search for life? And what signals should they be looking for? Some clues can be found in physical models, such as those developed by Judit Szulágyi, Assistant Professor of Computational Astrophysics, and her group. These models can be used to reconstruct how planets form over time from the initial, protoplanetary disk of dust and gas that swirls around a newly formed star, and they also help determine which objects are worthy of closer inspection via telescope.

Szulágyi builds models that take into account a whole range of factors, including gravitational forces, magnetism, the motion of gas, and the way starlight interacts with the disk material. By calculating countless different combinations of these parameters, we can get some idea of the diversity of planetary worlds that might exist in the universe.

Yet experience shows time and again that nature often has more up its sleeve than the models predict. For example, the first exoplanets took the scientific community by surprise because astronomers had never suspected that giant planets the size of Jupiter could orbit so close to their host star. Researchers were equally intrigued by the existence of so-called super-Earths, which are rocky like Earth but about one-and-a-half times larger.

Szulágyi acknowledges that her models regularly turn out to be inaccurate and require recalculation, yet she remains upbeat: "It constantly pushes us to rethink our ideas about how planets form." One of the key questions Szulágyi hopes to answer with her models concerns the origin of water. "Life on Earth requires water," she says. "Hence our interest in places that show evidence of water."

Such bodies can even be found within our own solar system, and astronomers are keen to find out more about them in the years ahead. They include Jupiter's moon Europa, which likely hosts an ocean beneath its thick icy crust, and Saturn's moon Enceladus, where scientists have observed fountains of ice particles erupting from the surface.

Entirely different worlds

Geology can also provide useful clues to the composition of alien worlds in other planetary systems. Paolo Sossi, Assistant Professor of Experimental Planetology, investigates the exotic minerals, liquids and gases that make up the interior and atmosphere of other planets. "We simulate a wide range of conditions in our experiments," he says. "They help us build up a picture of what's happening on a planet's surface and what's going on inside it."

Our knowledge of the chemical composition of other planets is still sketchy, which makes Sossi's task more challenging. "Examining the host star's optical spectrum gives us an initial idea of a planet's chemical make-up," says Sossi. "That provides the basis for understanding which elements are present and in what quantity."

By combining information on the various planets' mass and diameter with the results of modeling, scientists can then deduce how different elements are actually distributed throughout the planetary system around the star. Our own solar system is a useful reference, because 60 to 70% of all the star systems studied so far have a similar chemical composition. Sossi is therefore using numerical models to try and gain a better understanding of how Earth and its neighboring planets were formed. This gives him the information he needs to reconstruct the masses, number and distribution of the planets around other stars.

Yet there are also stars that have an entirely different chemical composition to that of our sun. For example, a star may contain more carbon and less oxygen, which might mean that the planets orbiting it are composed of different minerals than our Earth. "The predominant minerals on such carbon-rich planets could be silicon carbide and titanium carbide, or even diamonds," says Sossi. This, in turn, would have an impact on the planet's atmosphere—for example, rain on such a planet might consist of drops of graphite instead of water.

A long-term vision

Ultimately, the success of our search for alien life depends on a combination of different factors. Telescope observations, lab experiments and numerical models are undoubtedly key elements in any research program. But we will also need intelligent algorithms that can glean as much scientific information as possible from vast quantities of data, as well as instruments that provide the precise data researchers need. "Instrument development is a top priority for planet researchers like me," says Quanz. "As researchers, we need to understand how instruments work in order to know what kind of information we can get from them."

A long-term perspective is also essential, which is why Quanz is already thinking a step ahead. He is in charge of an international initiative that aims to make major headway in the search for alien life. This forms part of one of the large-class science missions that the European Space Agency ESA is launching between 2035 and 2050.

"We're reaching the limit of what we can achieve with ground-based telescopes, because all the molecules we're looking for also appear in the Earth's atmosphere, and the temperature of the Earth is similar to that of the exoplanets that interest us," he says. "If we want to escape the tremendous background noise created by the Earth, we have to head into space. It may well be the only way to detect traces of life in the exoplanet atmospheres."

Unfortunately, however, there is no way of installing telescopes in space that are as large as those in the Atacama Desert. Quanz and his colleagues have therefore proposed a bold project, known as the Large Interferometer for Exoplanets (LIFE). The idea is to position four additional small telescopes at the second Lagrange Point, which is where the James Webb Space Telescope took the spectacular images that recently wowed the world.

"By combining measurement signals from multiple small telescopes, we can achieve a resolution similar to that of a single, larger telescope." says Quanz. "This will enable us for the first time to directly image and chemically characterize dozens of Earth-like planets."

Before this can happen, scientists will need to resolve a whole series of technical challenges: the telescopes need to fly in a very precise formation that changes each time a new planetary system is targeted; the measurement signals from the individual satellites have to be synchronized with tremendous precision; and the telescopes must be equipped with extremely sensitive sensors designed to capture the little light emanating from the planet. Equally critical is the question of how the satellites will be powered, since repositioning them requires substantial amounts of fuel.

All this is technically feasible, says Quanz, though it will require a major effort not only by scientists, but also at a research-policy level. "Ultimately, it's a matter of priorities," he says. "For the first time, we have the chance to offer an empirical answer to the question of whether alien life exists. Finding that answer would fundamentally transform our view of the world—it's not an opportunity we should miss."

Provided by ETH Zurich 

Astronomers find that two exoplanets may be mostly water

When we swim in the ocean, we enter another animal's home. Here's how to keep us all safe

by Rebecca Olive, The Conversation

Credit: Shutterstock

Every summer, many Australians head to the ocean to swim, surf, sail, kayak, and walk along the beach.

But humans are not alone when we use the ocean. Fish, seals, dolphins, sharks, jellyfish, turtles, stingrays, cuttlefish, and birds often swim alongside us. When we enter the ocean we become part of an entangled web of animal relationships.

Encountering animals when we swim and surf in the ocean is fun and exciting. But sharing the water with animals also comes with the risk of stings, bites, frights, and injury to us. It can also bring harm to ocean wildlife.

By educating ourselves about marine life, humans can minimize risks to ourselves and the animals who call the ocean home.

We can frighten animals, and they can scare us

Despite how vulnerable we feel when swimming, our presence in the ocean can frighten or harm an animal. Animals may see us as a predator and alter their behavior accordingly.

Fish, birds and small stingrays might swim off, and turtles might delay rising to the ocean's surface to breathe.

Not all animals are frightened of humans. It's a highlight when curious dolphins swim and play around us. But dolphins can attack humans or other animals if they feel threatened—for example when feeding or protecting their young.

Humans can also be scared of animals in the water. This fear drives the use of shark nets off beaches or, less commonly, shark culls.

Shark nets are controversial—not least because they can entangle and kill animals including turtles, non-target sharks, stingrays, and whales.

Even more controversial are shark culls, such as those planned for Western Australia in 2013 after a spate of fatal shark attacks. The plan was later abandoned, after it was criticized as cruel and lacking scientific basis.

Killing or harming ocean animals so humans can have fun in the water raises all sorts of questions and moral dilemmas. So how else might we keep ourselves safe in the ocean?

Learn about ocean animals

Learning about what ocean animals you might encounter—and when—can help keep both people and animals safe.

Some animals are present year-round. But, as whale watchers and fisherman are well aware, many animals are more active in a particular seasons or only appear at certain times of the year.

For example, in cooler months in the waters off northern Australia, manta rays are most active. Leopard sharks, meanwhile, appear during warmer months in southeast Queensland and northeast New South Wales.

And from November until May or June, a variety of marine stingers can be found in the coastal waters of Far North Queensland. These include the potentially lethal box jellyfish.

Informing ourselves means we can take measures to keep safe. For example, people swimming in North Queensland in the warmer months are advised to swim at netted beaches, and wear wetsuits or stinger suits. Entering the water slowly also gives some marine stingers time to move away.

When it comes to sharks, there are growing calls to adopt non-violent approaches to minimize risks to humans. This could include public education on, for example, links between fish seasons and shark activity.

Educating ourselves about ocean animals also helps us protect them.

Shorebirds, for instance, nest in spring and summer. This is prime beach time for people, too. Shorebird nests are shallow and vulnerable, and birds will often abandon their eggs when humans are around. Dogs and 4WDs pose an even bigger threat.

If we know we're sharing a beach with nesting shorebirds, we can take steps to ensure their safety, such as keeping our dogs on a leash and avoiding using dunes and other common nesting areas.

The annual migration of whales and their calves up and down our coasts is an exciting time to visit the beach and, if you're lucky, to view a splashy show of breaching or water slapping.

But if you plan to go sailing or kayaking, be aware of rules around interacting with whales. They law states they can approach us, but we must not get too close to them.

If you're not an experienced ocean user, or don't know about the animals living in a particular place, talk to someone who is informed.

If you use beaches patrolled by surf lifesavers they can give you information about animals that might be present that day, such as sharks or jellyfish. They can also tell you about ocean conditions such as rips, currents and water quality.

If you do suffer a painful bluebottle or jellyfish sting, surf lifesavers may also provide basic treatments such as dousing the sting with hot water or vinegar.

If you're planning to swim or surf at unpatrolled beaches—especially if they're remote—pack a basic first aid kit including sunscreen, vinegar and instant ice packs.

And remember, enjoying time in the ocean with other poeple is safer than swimming alone.

Ensuring everyone enjoys the encounter

Despite the risks, most human encounters with animals in the ocean are exciting and positive.

Learning about the kinds of animals you might come across, as well as the best ways to interact with them, will help keep you safe—and make sure its a good experience for the animals too.

Provided by The Conversation 

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Hunt on for great white shark that killed Sydney swimmer

 

China is considering where to build a lunar research station

by Andy Tomaswick, Universe Today

The Chang’e 4 lunar exploration rover rolling off its lander. Credit: CNSA/CASC/CLEP

The second moon race is in full swing, with the world's two big superpowers angling to score a new set of firsts on the lunar surface. NASA's Artemis program recently clocked up its first success with the splashdown of Orion, but China is looking to take the lead when it comes to setting up a fully-fledged lunar research station. One of the first steps in that process—figuring out where to put it. That is what a new paper attempts to quantify, and it comes up with a practical solution—the south pole.

There are plenty of advantages to the lunar south pole. It also checks many of the boxes that the Chinese scientists were looking for when they developed their criteria for potential landing sites.

They broke those criteria into two categories—scientific and engineering constraints. Engineering constraints included considerations like the illumination a site receives, its general slope, and the ease with which explorers could access other parts of the moonscape. Scientific constraints, which this particular paper focuses on, include considerations such as water ice exposure, hydrogen abundance, and temperature.

The south pole, therefore, seems ideal, given its relative flatness and relatively constant temperature in the permanently shaded regions of some of its craters. Those craters also most likely hold the largest amount of frozen water deposits on the moon, making access to them an extremely high priority for any permanent base.

It also has access to one of the oldest basins on the moon—the South Pole—Aitken (SPA) basin. Plenty of questions about the early formation of the moon itself and the solar system could be answered more generally by looking at the soil in the basin.

Credit: Universe Today

To further explore the region, China plans to send a set of additional robotic explorers to continue the Chang'e program that has brought back the most recent lunar sample. The next, Chang'e 6, plans to bring back a lunar sample from the south pole specifically, and its insights might provide a better understanding of any future site.

As the program progresses, Chang'e 7 will provide a comprehensive survey of the south polar region, while Chang'e 8 will serve as a technology validation mission for some of the technologies that will be vital in constructing a base there. At the end of the program, the China National Space Agency might have enough information to implement its plan to launch an international, cooperative lunar research base. Hopefully, with that information, China will be able to bring some benefits from the moon back to Earth.

More information: Teng Hu et al, Possible sites for a Chinese international lunar research station in the lunar south polar region, Planetary and Space Science (2022). DOI: 10.1016/j.pss.2022.105623

Journal information: Planetary and Space Science 

Provided by Universe Today 

NASA Artemis1 to carry ASU CubeSat into space

Discovering the 'honeypot': The surprising way restricting immigration can turn out to hurt the working poor

by Dean Hoi, The Conversation

Credit: U.S. Library of Congress

Politicians around the world tout immigration restrictions as a way to fight wage stagnation and boost the job prospects of low-paid or unemployed locals.

The Trump administration pushed the message aggressively, at one stage calling a proposal to halve migration numbers the RAISE Act (standing for Reforming American Immigration for a Strong Economy), saying it would raise workers' wages and help struggling families enter the middle class.

Whether or not cutting low-skilled migration would lift working class wages remains a highly contentious question.

My research examines the question in a broader way. Its findings—looking back at an extraordinary time of change in U.S. history, from the 1880s on—suggest that while restricting immigration might at first help low-income workers, over time it hurts those local workers. This is due to what I call the "honeypot effect," in which wage hikes for poor jobs keep people in poor jobs.

The problem is that there are very few real-world immigration restrictions to examine. Immigration to the global West has been rising steadily since the 1960s.

The COVID pandemic essentially eliminated immigration for a short time, but it is as good as impossible to isolate the effects of that from the effects of everything else that was going on at the same time.

America's first exclusion: The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882

Up until 1882, the U.S. had an open-border policy with virtually no restrictions on entry. The Chinese Exclusion Act—introduced that year in response to the widespread belief that low-skilled Chinese immigrants were responsible for depressed wages and unemployment—was a first.

It was also long-lasting. It completely prohibited the immigration of Chinese laborers for more than fifty years.

It represents an ideal so-called "natural experiment." Because Chinese immigration had been very heavily concentrated in certain locations, its impact was isolated to those locations, allowing what happened where it did restrict immigration to be compared to what happened where it did not.

And I discovered there was data. The U.S. Government fully discloses Census data after 72 years. This allowed me to link individuals across U.S. censuses to track the employment situation of millions of Americans over the entirety of their working lives.

A significant, negative, long-term effect

What I found was surprising. The Chinese Exclusion Act had a significant, negative long-term effect on American workers. My estimate is that workers in locations exposed to the Act earned on average 6–15% less over their working lives than their counterparts in other locations

The negative effects were strongest for low-skilled and unemployed workers.

The exclusion of Chinese immigrants not only failed to improve conditions for working-class Americans, but made them substantially worse off in the long run.

The honeypot and the occupational ladder

Then I set out to examine this seemingly counter-intuitive result: why shortages of low-skilled labor had led to worse long-term outcomes for low-skilled workers.

The answer appears to lie in a "honeypot" effect.

A closer look suggests the Chinese Exclusion Act was initially successful in boosting low-skilled wages and the employment of Americans in low-skilled jobs in the regions it had an effect.

This created a "honeypot"—American workers in those locations increasingly took and remained in low-skilled jobs. They became significantly less likely to become educated, meaning they fell behind their counterparts in other locations on the occupational ladder.

And their initial wage gains were short-lived, with increased arrivals from other countries and other parts of the U.S. eventually filling the labor shortages.

This left the workers who had opted to stay in low-skilled jobs stuck with low pay, depressing their lifetime earnings compared to their counterparts in regions unaffected by the Chinese Exclusion Act.

Underlying the honeypot effect is the reality that most workers progress up an occupation ladder over their working lives, often as a result of education and training.

But education involves trade-offs. It can require giving up immediate income to earn more down the track.

Immediate income which is higher is harder to give up.

And there might be another mechanism at play. When low-skilled workers are in short supply, there might be fewer high-skilled jobs on offer because high-skilled jobs need low-skilled jobs to complement them.

Implications for today

The economy of 1882 bears little resemblance to today's economy and we should take care in drawing general conclusions.

However, studies of modern immigration inflows into the United States and Europe also find they boost the education and occupational status of native workers, suggesting the processes underlying the honeypot effect are present in modern economies.

Immigration restrictions are too blunt an instrument and their effects are too complex to be used to boost wages and employment.

My findings suggest that even if restrictions are successful in creating wage gains for some in the short run, they are just as likely to lead to negative outcomes for locals in the long run.

This is not to say that increasing low-skilled wages is a bad thing. But immigration restrictions can only create temporary, unsustainable wage increases.

There are better, more sustainable ways to help low-skilled workers, backed by stronger evidence.

Attempts to help low-skilled workers should promote—or at the very least not discourage—education and occupational upgrading. That way they would help the low-skilled workers and the economy as a whole.

Provided by The Conversation 

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Increase in immigration has little impact on the wages of US citizens

Researchers test 3D printing materials used for art projects to see if they will stand the test of time

by Bob Yirka , Tech Xplore

Reference FTIR spectrum of ABS (a) and PLA (b). Credit: Journal of Cultural 

Heritage (2022). DOI: 10.1016/j.culher.2022.12.005

A team of researchers at Universidad Complutense de Madrid, has tested two of the most popular materials used to 3D print useful objects, including those used for art projects, to see how well they might stand the test of time. In their paper published in Journal of Cultural Heritage, the group describes subjecting 3D printed objects to heat and UV radiation.

The researchers began by noting that many of the materials used to create art objects in the past have shown strong resilience to the passage of time. For instance, drawings on rocks made thousands of years ago, or sculptures and paintings made hundreds of years ago, are still around today. They then noted that many future art objects may be created using 3D printing, which got them to wondering if such objects may last as long as more traditional media.

To find out, they tested two of the main materials currently used to print 3D objects: polylactic acid (PLA) and acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS). Testing involved applying two of the main things that lead to degradation of materials—heat and UV radiation—in an accelerated way.

The researchers placed 3D-printed objects (along with some samples of the "ink" used to print the objects) in an oven and heated them to different temperatures over different time periods. They did the same with objects placed in a chamber that emitted different amounts of UV radiation. They also subjected some of the objects to both tests.

The researchers found that both types of materials underwent some degree of chemical change, though PLA tended to do better. They also found that ABS tended to lose more of its color and lost more of its structural integrity than PLA. The researchers suggest that art objects made with current 3D-printing technology are not likely to last as well as more traditional materials. They plan to continue their work by testing other materials and other stressors.

More information: Margarita San Andrés et al, Use of 3D printing PLA and ABS materials for fine art. Analysis of composition and long-term behaviour of raw filament and printed parts, Journal of Cultural Heritage (2022). DOI: 10.1016/j.culher.2022.12.005

© 2023 Science X Network

3-D printing glass objects

Large volcanic outburst discovered on Jupiter's moon Io

by Planetary Science Institute

IoIO image of Jovian sodium nebula in outburst Credit: Jeff Morgenthaler, PSI.

A large volcanic outburst was discovered on Jupiter's moon Io by Jeff Morgenthaler of the Planetary Science Institute using PSI's Io Input/Output observatory (IoIO).

PSI Senior Scientist Morgenthaler has been using IoIO, located near Benson, Arizona, to monitor volcanic activity on Io since 2017. The observations show some sort of outburst nearly every year, but the largest yet was seen in the fall of 2022.

Io is the innermost of Jupiter's four large moons and is the most volcanic body in the Solar System thanks to the tidal stresses it feels from Jupiter and two of its other large satellites, Europa and Ganymede.

IoIO uses a coronagraphic technique which dims the light coming from Jupiter to enable imaging of faint gases near the very bright planet. A brightening of two of these gases, sodium and ionized sulfur, began between July and September 2022 and lasted until December 2022. The ionized sulfur, which forms a donut-like structure that encircles Jupiter and is called the Io plasma torus, was curiously not nearly as bright in this outburst as previously seen. "This could be telling us something about the composition of the volcanic activity that produced the outburst or it could be telling us that the torus is more efficient at ridding itself of material when more material is thrown into it," Morgenthaler said.

Credit: Planetary Science Institute

The observations have profound implications for NASA's Juno mission, which has been orbiting Jupiter since 2016. Juno flew past Europa during the outburst and is gradually approaching Io for a close flyby December 2023. Several of Juno's instruments are sensitive to changes in the plasma environment around Jupiter and Io that can be traced directly to the type of volcanic activity observed by IoIO. "Juno measurements may be able to tell us if this volcanic outburst had a different composition than previous ones," Morgenthaler said.

Time history of the brightness of Jovian sodium nebula at three different distances from 

Jupiter (top) and the Io plasma torus (bottom), showing several modest outbursts and one 

large outburst fall of 2022. Credit: Jeff Morgenthaler, PSI. 

"One of the exciting things about these observations is that they can be reproduced by almost any small college or ambitious amateur astronomer," said Morgenthaler. "Almost all of the parts used to build IoIO are available at a high-end camera shop or telescope store."

Having one or more copies of IoIO running somewhere else would be very helpful in avoiding weather gaps and could potentially provide more time coverage each night of Jupiter's highly dynamic Io plasma torus and sodium nebula. "It would be great to see another IoIO come on line before Juno gets to Jupiter next December," Morgenthaler said.

IoIO time sequence of singly ionized sulfur in the Io plasma torus showing how the structure

 rotates with Jupiter's powerful magnetic field which, like Earth's is not perfectly aligned with 

the rotation axis of the planet. Credit: Jeff Morgenthaler, PSI.

In addition to observing the Jovian sodium nebula, IoIO also observes Mercury's sodium tail, bright comets and transiting extra-solar planets.

Provided by Planetary Science Institute 

Sodium, not heat, reveals volcanic activity on Jupiter's moon Io