Monday, August 22, 2022

BOOK REVIEW
Can the NORTH American Mall Survive?
On loving and loathing some of America’s most common public spaces


Jillian Steinhauer/August 22, 2022
ILLUSTRATION BY PETER OUMANSKI

LONG READ

In the days before the pandemic, when I visited the Museum of Modern Art, I would stop at Mrs. Fields. Mrs. Fields does not have the best cookies, especially in a city teeming with boutique bakeries. But getting a snack there was never about the quality of the food itself. A Mrs. Fields cookie summons up a weekend in the early 1990s when my parents would pack me and my siblings into our Volvo station wagon and drive us half an hour over state lines to the mall in Stamford, Connecticut. There, my mom would peruse high-end stores that didn’t have locations in our hometown, while my dad would take us kids to buy cookies and eat them on the steps that formed the mall’s gathering spot.

You could tell the story of many suburban childhoods through a progression of visits to such anodyne shopping centers. Once I was old enough to go to malls on my own, I met up with friends at the two main ones in White Plains, the New York City suburb where I grew up: the Galleria, where I got my ears pierced at Claire’s, and the Westchester, a shiny new beacon whose upscale nature was reflected in the fact that it had carpeting. By the time I moved away for college, I was over the world I left behind. When people asked where I was from, I’d answer, “a soulless suburb of New York City with no culture but lots of malls.”


Meet Me by the Fountain: An Inside History of the Mall
by Alexandra Lange
Buy on Bookshop
Bloomsbury, 320 pp., $28.00

I haven’t spent much time in shopping centers since—partly by choice, partly through circumstance. Malls have been struggling in one way or another since the 1990s, thanks to a slew of factors: a glut of such shopping centers, the replacement of department stores with big-box ones, recessions, the rise of the internet, and a new generation of mega-developer owners who are more cutthroat about their bottom lines. Even before the pandemic, which made gathering indoors dangerous, fewer Americans were whiling away their weekends and after-school hours at the mall. Yet for so many of us, the image of a sunlit atrium crossed by steadily gliding escalators, with a Bath & Body Works looming in the background, evokes a deep nostalgia. Like how, the minute I walk by a Mrs. Fields and smell that intoxicating scent of butter, sugar, and chocolate, my defenses drop.
Beat inflation: Subscribe before prices rise.1 year for $10.Subscribe

The mall is “ubiquitous and underexamined and potentially a little bit embarrassing,” the design critic Alexandra Lange notes in the introduction to her new book, Meet Me by the Fountain: An Inside History of the Mall. Shopping is part of our daily lives, as are the spaces where we do it. Malls are fixtures of our physical and psychic landscapes, embedded with social and personal histories. They’re loaded symbols within our culture, inspiring feelings of allegiance or contempt. In George Romero’s famous 1978 movie, Dawn of the Dead, the mall is a home for humans and zombies alike. In the third season of the ’80s-nostalgic TV show Stranger Things, it’s simultaneously a place of teenage possibility and a Russian front for a sci-fi lab. In contemporary “ruin porn” photography, the empty shells of malls represent the just deserts of late-stage capitalism.

What makes malls the object of both longing and disdain? The civic purpose of the mall—unlike libraries, schools, and museums—has never been entirely clear. “In contrast to many other forms of public architecture, which embody fear, power, and knowledge, the mall is personal,” Lange writes. It’s not an institution, officially speaking, but it is social, a rare type of place intended to encourage hanging out. “At their best, malls create community through shared experience,” Lange says; at their worst, they’re temples to consumerism. They offer freedom—from parents, strict rules, the weather—even as they’re policed. They’re public, sort of, but also private, providing convenience at a price. Malls are not necessarily the communal spaces we would design for ourselves, but in a country short on alternatives, they’re the ones we’ve been given. Is it any surprise that we want them to be so much more?

The story of the mall, like so many quintessentially American things, begins with an immigrant. The architect Victor Gruen (née Viktor Grünbaum) was an Austrian Jewish émigré who fled the Nazis in 1938; upon arriving in the United States, he began designing eye-catching shops and other commercial projects in a European modernist style. Visionary and ambitious, Gruen didn’t invent the mall whole cloth, but he did pioneer the form and help embed it firmly in the American landscape.

Twentieth-century malls grew in part out of nineteenth-century arcades and department stores, important spaces for shopping and socialization. Their more immediate predecessors, however, were the shopping centers created for the suburbs that were growing around U.S. cities. As Lange explains, many of these were modeled on the idea of a high street: “the most artistic pattern for shopping districts outside the urban core looked like Main Street—but a Main Street transplanted to the edge of town and built all at once.” Gruen was drawn to the idea of creating a “one-stop shopping area” designed to serve a given community, but he wanted to find a different way to do it.

His first attempt was theoretical: For a 1943 issue of Architectural Forum magazine, he and his partner, Elsie Krummeck, dreamed up a neighborhood shopping center with an open-air courtyard that would be more than just a place of commerce; it would contain the “necessities of day-to-day living,” like doctors’ offices and a library. “Shopping thus becomes a pleasure, recreation instead of a chore,” they wrote. Eleven years later, that vision—in spirit, if not details—became a reality with the opening of Northland, a shopping center outside Detroit. Northland was funded by a downtown department store, Hudson’s, which also served as the core of the new complex. Around it, Gruen arrayed five more buildings containing smaller shops. The spaces between the buildings were connected by manicured, art-filled outdoor plazas, which were named after the features of various European cities (and curated by the artist Lily Swann Saarinen, wife of architect and designer Eero).

Northland was a success by multiple measures: Critics applauded the design, and people came, tens of thousands of them. Gruen next went to Minneapolis, where, in a similar scenario—a downtown department store investing in the suburbs—he expanded on his original concept by adding a key feature: air conditioning. The mall would be entirely enclosed, meaning you could shop, worry-free, year-round; an ad for the new center, called Southdale, boasted, “Every day will be a perfect shopping day.” Hammering home the wonder of such a feat, Gruen designed a “Garden Court of Perpetual Spring,” which Lange deems “the inspiration for all future mall atria.” It occupied the center of Southdale, stretching three stories high and almost a block long, with trees, a café, art, a carousel, and a cage filled with birds. Like Northland’s plazas, it was a leisurely environment, the kind of space where you’d want to linger—but now you could do so anytime, in any weather.

The court helped set the stage for what theorists call the “Gruen transfer,” defined by Lange as “the moment when your presence at the mall tips from being goal-oriented ... into a pleasure in itself.” Why come to buy one item when you could while away the day? This was what made Gruen’s designs novel: In his hands, the mall wasn’t just utilitarian; it was aspirational. Not just “Somewhere To Go”—to use a phrase coined by Ray Bradbury and referenced by Lange—but somewhere to be.

Depending, of course, on who you are. One of the problems of malls, like so many American things, is the discrimination embedded in them from the start. They originated in the suburbs, where white Americans fled in the postwar decades, building segregated communities in the process. Lange discusses Kansas City’s Country Club District, an early and influential suburb with its own Main Street–style shopping plaza. The developer, J.C. Nichols, “set a design standard that would be imitated in many other places,” she writes, and enforced it with form-based deed restrictions that also included racial strictures: no Black buyers. “The shopping mall, from its origins in plazas such as this one in Kansas City, has to be seen as a racist form,” Lange concludes, “born from speculation that a whites-only version of the city ... would prove to be a better return on investment.”

Even when discrimination was less blunt, structural forces still ensured that malls were meccas mostly for white people. The Federal Housing Administration, commercial banks, and developers colluded to keep Black people out of certain neighborhoods by redlining and refusing to insure mortgages, and exploited them by flipping houses in white neighborhoods at higher prices, a practice known as blockbusting. What’s more, while Gruen had envisioned his malls sitting within mixed-use neighborhoods that would integrate more of the needs and activities of a community, the developers he worked with often sold off the surrounding land in order to make money. This, combined with mid-century federal funding for highways at the expense of all other forms of transit, further consolidated the exclusionary realities of the suburbs and their attendant malls. “In proposing a downtown outside downtown, protected from the elements, ringed by parking lots, designed for a single use and rigidly planned,” Lange observes, “Victor Gruen had also created a mechanism to protect white, upwardly mobile homeowners from those unlike themselves.”

The malls of the ’50s and ’60s departed from Gruen’s vision in other ways, too, becoming more uniform and less surprising as they spread across the country. Amid a wave of new building, architects and developers set standards dictating how malls should look and feel. The Urban Land Institute’s annual Community Builders’ Handbook proposed, for instance, that a community center should have 20 to 40 businesses, including a florist and liquor store, and offered four types of layouts. There was the cluster format that Gruen had used for Southdale, but more popular was a simpler form of mall: the I-shaped plan with anchor department stores on either end, connected by two rows of shops and an enclosed hallway. From there, L- and T-shaped plans developed that allowed for three anchor stores, or an X, which had four. Recognizing these elements as the core building blocks of malls—although they would become more bloated and complicated—helps explain why they often feel so familiar. It’s not just certain stores that appear again and again; it’s the way they’re laid out. There’s an underlying logic to them.

That extends to the interiors as well. The handbook recommends everything from a maximum ideal hallway distance between stores (65 feet) to the inclusion of “active features such as statuary, bird cages, kiosks, small animal cages (but be careful to avoid having monkeys), aquariums, and the like,” in order to induce “an active and attractive environment which creates an appeal not possible on a conventional pedestrian sidewalk.” This is the stuff of the Gruen transfer, and it’s essential to how malls were constructed, as sterile pleasure gardens of a kind. It’s also part of what makes them feel so weird. The inclusion of fountains and plants (but not monkeys!) dresses up the artificial space of the mall in nature; the inclusion of art wraps shopping in sophistication. These qualities can feel especially jarring when you step outside and find yourself facing a sea of paved parking lot.

In many ways, the process of implementing standards and designing shopping malls was about control. Lange tells of how Gruen’s idea for Northdale came in response to driving around Detroit and its environs and finding them a “mess” (her word). In Dallas in the 1960s, Raymond and Patsy Nasher built a shopping center, NorthPark, whose hallmark—beyond the stellar art collection it houses today—is its sophisticated coordination of everything from building materials to graphic design specifications. As the suburbs sprawled, developers, architects, and shoppers alike sought to impose order on them; they wanted to escape and refute the unwieldy realities of the city. “The ‘regional center,’” Lange writes, referring to one of the handbook’s designations, “was clean and neatly maintained ... it lacked vehicular congestion, jostling crowds, street noise, the ‘wrong’ social elements, and crime—all departures from qualities associated with downtown.”

But building your own new downtown comes with problems, too. The more you try to control the environment, the more stifling it becomes. I think this is why I turned on malls after spending my formative years inside them. As I got older, I yearned for the unpredictability of a less manicured and mass-produced reality, one more surprising than what a stop at the Gap or Sbarro could offer. The more I understood the codes and rules of suburban shopping centers, the more I longed for the world outside of them.

As the 1970s gave way to the 1980s, malls tried to fight their reputation for dreary conformity by going even bigger and more immersive. Inspired in part by the essays of science-fiction writer Ray Bradbury, the architect Jon Jerde began designing spaces that were more like world’s fairs and theme parks than the orderly, sedate shopping centers of previous decades. Seen from above, San Diego’s Horton Plaza, one of his first major retail projects, looked like someone took a knife and cut a thin, diagonal slice out of multiple city blocks. The colorful, five-level pedestrian mall was dotted with stairs, escalators, and bridges and divided into six sections, each based on a different city’s architecture. It was the classic Main Street idea, given the mega-funhouse treatment. Jerde’s aesthetic was postmodern pastiche, a mash-up of international references, and he included waterways, movie theaters, and, in the case of the giant Mall of America, an entire theme park in his plans. John Simones, who has worked at Jerde’s firm since 1984, summed it up as “the idea of moving from a typical mall, a place of consumption, to a place of experience.”

In a way, Jrde’s idea wasn’t entirely dissimilar from Gruen’s or those of other predecessors: He wanted the mall to be a destination. But he made it so for a wider swath of visitors. He recognized that by the ’80s, splashing fountains and novelty trees were not enough to draw people; you had to “make shopping beside the point,” as a writer for Los Angeles Magazine once summed it up. And it worked. After all, if the mall is a model of consolidation, why not add entertainment? There’s something freeing about shedding stuffy, middle-class values for good old-fashioned American fun, of embracing over-the-top artificiality and not pretending that a shopping trip is about anything besides consumption, whether of pretzels, shoes, or experiences.

Plenty of malls today follow Jerde’s precedent, including New Jersey’s American Dream, where entertainment—including what’s billed as “North America’s first and only indoor, real-snow, year-round ski and snow resort”—accounts for more than half the space. Opened in fall 2019, American Dream has struggled financially, something that Lange attributes not just to the pandemic but to the design itself, calling it a mall that has “gone too far.” While I was working on this essay, though, I saw a friend who’d been there with his daughter the week before. I said I’d heard the mall was too big, empty, and floundering, but this surprised him. He said they’d seen plenty of visitors and had a great time.

Jerde wasn’t just trying to get people to spend more time and money on shopping; he wanted to build on malls’ potential to be social spaces. “In America the last vestiges of community are a parade, a football game and a shopping center,” he once said. And in fact, in many places, malls have served that function, as Lange details in a chapter devoted to various groups and subcultures that have found and made homes there. There are mall walkers like Caroline Knutson, who began doing laps at Salem, Oregon’s Lancaster Mall in 1982 and was still doing them (albeit fewer) in 2013, when she was vision impaired and needed a walker. Mall walking has become so popular that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention sponsored a guide to it in 2015, noting the value of “level surfaces, benches for places to rest, water fountains,” and “accessible restrooms.” It’s not just amenities that are a draw, however; it’s the creation of social bonds. For years until a 2015 renovation, the food court at the Gallery in Philadelphia served as a “de facto senior center” on weekday mornings, as mostly older Black men gathered to talk and people-watch. The presence of such groups is how even malls that look disconcertingly like every other mall become particular and unique.

Yet malls often have an uneasy relationship with those groups that love them most. Perhaps the clearest example of this is teenagers, who have been both courted and overpoliced at the mall. In pop culture, as in real places like my hometown, malls are a center of teenage life: a place to see and be seen, to roam without adults, to spend some money figuring out what you want to wear or own or play, and by extension who you want to be. And importantly, they’re capacious, home to Clueless’s Cher, a preppy, rich girl whose favorite form of self-care is shopping, as much as to Mallrats’ Brodie Bruce and T.S. Quint, slacker dudes who take refuge at the mall after being dumped. Malls have spaces—like the thousands of arcades built in the 1980s—and stores—like that trend-tracking staple, Hot Topic—meant for teens, and they promise a modicum of independence.

That independence can easily be taken away. In Mallrats, T.S.’s ex-girlfriend’s dad has the guys arrested on false charges. In real life, a video-game and arcade panic in the late ’80s led many malls to increase private security and install CCTV. Those measures were followed by codes of conduct and parental escort policies, the first of which was instituted by the Mall of America in 1996 and mandated that anyone under 16 had to be accompanied by an adult after 3 p.m. Lange reports that the American Civil Liberties Union “immediately opposed” the policy for “infringing on the rights of young people,” while local activists in Minneapolis felt it had been implemented specifically because teens of color were hanging out at the mall.

Black, Indigenous, and people of color (especially teens) have faced suspicion and profiling at malls. “The problem with going to department stores is every time a Black person enters, they get followed,” says the comedian Chris Rock in voice-over in an episode of his quasi-autobiographical sitcom, Everybody Hates Chris. A satisfying scene in the 1997 film Selena captures how racist and class-based dynamics can play out at the mall: A white saleswoman in a boutique dismisses Selena (Jennifer Lopez) as too poor to afford an $800 dress, but while her friend is trying it on, word gets around among Latinx mall workers that the Mexican American pop star is there. They mob the store asking for autographs, and amid the fawning crowd, Selena calls out to the saleswoman, “Excuse me, miss? We don’t need the dress.”

Some of the most successful—at least by Lange’s standards, maybe not those of developers—malls have adapted to embrace the people who now live near them. If malls began as spaces by and for white people, many have taken on new lives in the intervening decades. For one thing, the suburbs where many of them are located have become far more diverse. Lange discusses places like California’s Westfield Santa Anita, which has flourished by catering to the local Asian American population and bringing in Asian stores and eateries, and Atlanta’s Plaza Fiesta, a community hub that hews to Gruen’s original vision by housing shops as well as dentists, insurance agents, and a bus company that runs trips to Mexico. (Plaza Fiesta is a project by José de Jesús Legaspi, who has “an almost twenty-year career in retrofitting dying malls for Latinx and Caribbean entrepreneurs and customers across the country.”)

Lange also looks at shopping centers that have thrived with a different clientele than the one their builders intended: A prime example is Fulton Mall in Downtown Brooklyn, a longtime shopping street whose makeover in the 1980s failed to attract suburbanites but turned it into a locus for the surrounding, largely Black communities. In such cases, it’s clear how successful malls can be when they actually work for the people around them.

Still, there’s a reason the United States today is littered with dead and dying malls: We have more of them than we need. A question kept nagging me as I read Meet Me by the Fountain—one that Lange answers but not, I think, completely convincingly: Should malls be saved? She says yes, making the case that “the mall is neither a joke nor a den of zombies, but a resource. America’s dead malls represent millions of square feet of matériel that are not going to be reabsorbed without investment and effort.” This is an important point: No one is served by hulking, decaying structures, least of all the people who live nearby, and Lange details some fascinating examples of adaptive reuse, including one former shopping center that’s been transformed into an Austin Community College campus.

But while she’s defensive about those who catalog dead malls with glee (see: ­deadmalls.com), I understand the impulse—although my take has always been more of a lament. Instead of multiple shopping centers with similarly sterile interiors, why couldn’t my suburban hometown have had theaters, a skate park, nature trails, and more sidewalks? We all need places to go to sit among strangers and bump into friends, but I wish I’d been given more opportunities to do so that weren’t linked to commerce or set to the sounds of Muzak or Top 40 pop.

For all the services malls provide, they remain private spaces. We can try to improve them by making them more diverse and democratic, but we also have to contend with the reality that they are in many ways a private substitute for things the government has failed (or, arguably, refuses) to provide. Instead of public plazas with fountains to lounge around, we get food courts. In place of rent regulations to encourage small-business owners, we get Auntie Anne’s and Hot Topic. Our planners forgo walkable downtowns for a strip of shops you have to drive to. More often than public parks, we get parking lots.

When I think about malls, I find myself wondering where else the money spent on them could go. Lange takes considerable time analyzing the layout of the Shops and Restaurants at Hudson Yards, the mall within the $25 billion real estate project on Manhattan’s West Side. Yet she doesn’t ever explain how Hudson Yards’ developer, the Related Companies, siphoned off at least $1.2 billion in funding via a gerrymandered district for a visa program that’s meant to support investment in areas with high unemployment—which Midtown West is not.

We’re living in a golden age of privatization, extending from social media to city parks. This means our amenities come with strings attached and harmful consequences, like misallocation of money or neglect of poorer communities. The history of the mall has at least taught us that. What would it look like if we tried to reclaim some of the space we’ve lost and demanded more from our leaders in the process? When I think about the future I want, I don’t envision a new and improved version of the mall. I want more truly public space, which is so hard to come by in the United States. I have plenty of places to shop. What I want is somewhere to socialize, somewhere to pee, and somewhere to rest.


Jillian Steinhauer @jilnotjill
Jillian Steinhauer writes about art and politics for The New York Times, The Nation, The New Republic, and other publications.


Crimes U.S. has committed in Middle East: Establishing black sites, inhumanly treating prisoners

(People's Daily Online), August 22, 2022



Cartoon by Ma Hongliang

The United States has committed a series of crimes that have seriously violated international law in the Middle East and surrounding regions. Its torturing of prisoners from the Muslim community has become an indelible stain on the country’s human rights record.

The “Costs of War” Project at Brown University in the U.S. has noted that following the 9/11 attacks, Washington orchestrated a system of black sites in at least 54 countries and regions across the world. Hundreds of thousands of people were detained at these sites, including Muslims, women and children.

As early as 2003, the U.S. military blatantly abused detainees at Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq, resulting in a large number of deaths. In September 2021, the U.S. prison and prisoner abuse practices at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan were also exposed by the media.

The Guantanamo Bay detention camp in Cuba, which the U.S. has continuously failed to shut down, is one of the notorious “black sites” the U.S. has established overseas to detain “terrorists” from the Middle East and elsewhere. The detention camp has locked up a total of some 780 prisoners, many of whom have been held without bringing any criminal charge.

More than 30 people, old and frail, remain in the prison. They are deprived of their liberty for long periods of time and subjected to endless mental and physical torture.

In addition to widespread abuse and torture at Guantanamo, American personnel have tortured prisoners by desecrating the Quran and violating Islamic beliefs, which sparked collective protests and even caused mass suicides among the detainees.

The humiliating and cruel treatment of prisoners by the U.S. military constitutes a grave violation of their fundamental right to human dignity and of U.S. obligations under international human rights law to prohibit torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

The black sites are a hugely ironic blemish on American politicians, who on the one hand label their country as a champion of human rights, and yet on the other have been exposed for the hypocrisy and double-standards of American-style human rights.

Related:

Crimes U.S. has committed in Middle East: Killing civilians, trampling on people’s right to life

Crimes U.S. has committed in Middle East: Transplanting American-style democracy, stirring up trouble
(Web editor: Hongyu, Bianji)
Pfizer and Valneva could soon have a vaccine for Lyme disease

Cottage Life - 


Pharmaceutical companies Pfizer and Valneva are collaborating to create a vaccine designed to protect against tick-borne Lyme disease. The two companies are entering a late-stage clinical trial where they plan to test the vaccine on 6,000 participants.


© Photo by Erik Karits/ShutterstockPfizer and Valneva could soon have a vaccine for Lyme disease

“With increasing global rates of Lyme disease, providing a new option for people to help protect themselves from the disease is more important than ever,” said Annaliesa Anderson, Pfizer’s head of vaccine research and development, in a statement.

Lyme disease: Interview with a biologist

The companies plan to test the vaccine, known as VLA15, in 50 sites where Lyme disease is “highly endemic”, including Finland, Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, and the U.S. Ages of participants will range from five years old and up.

Participants in the trial will receive three doses of either the vaccine or a placebo, plus one booster consisting of a vaccine or placebo.

“Data from the Phase 2 studies continue to demonstrate strong immunogenicity in adults as well as in children, with acceptable safety and tolerability profiles in both study populations,” Pfizer said.

The vaccine works by blocking a protein, known as OspA, in the bacteria that causes Lyme disease. By blocking OspA, the bacterium is unable to leave the tick and infect humans.

Pfizer and Valneva entered into their collaboration in April 2020. If the clinical trials prove successful, Pfizer said it believes it could seek approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to release the vaccine in the U.S. and Europe by 2025. Considering the FDA’s close partnership with Health Canada, it’s likely the vaccine would be approved in Canada the same year.

This wouldn’t be the first time the FDA has approved a Lyme disease vaccine. In 1998, GlaxoSmithKline released LYMErix, which reduced new infections in vaccinated adults by nearly 80 per cent. But the drug was pulled after three years due to low sales.

Since the 2000s, the number of people affected by Lyme disease has grown. In 2009, Health Canada reported 144 cases of Lyme disease. Case numbers have progressively gotten higher, peaking at 2,851 in 2021. In the U.S., the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that as many as 476,000 Americans are infected with Lyme disease each year.

Lyme disease is spread through the bite of an infected black-legged tick, typically found in areas with high grass or brush. The ticks attach themselves as people pass by, usually migrating to hard-to-see areas, such as the groin, armpits, and scalp. The tick must be attached for 36 to 48 hours for the disease to transfer.

Three simple habits that will help keep you safe from Lyme disease

Signs of infection include fever, chills, headache, fatigue, muscle and joint aches, and swollen lymph nodes. If caught early, Lyme disease can be treated with antibiotics. But if the disease isn’t treated, it could result in facial palsy, arthritis, inflammation of the brain and spinal cord, and heart palpitations known as Lyme carditis.

A number of Canadian celebrities have spoken publicly about their battles with Lyme disease, including singers Justin Bieber and Avril Lavigne.

“Lyme disease continues to spread, representing a high unmet medical need that impacts the lives of many in the Northern Hemisphere,” said Juan Carlos Jaramillo, Valneva’s chief medical officer, in a statement. “We look forward to further investigating the VLA15 candidate in Phase 3, which will take us a step closer to potentially bringing this vaccine to both adults and children who would benefit from it.”
Trudeau questions business case for natural gas exports from Canada to Europe


Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said the government is open to easing regulatory requirements for projects that would facilitate the export of Canadian natural gas to Europe, but questioned whether a business case exists for such investments.




The comments came Monday during a joint news conference with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz in Montreal as the prime minister hosted the German leader during a visit that will also include stops in Toronto and Newfoundland.

The question of what role Canada could play floated like a cloud over the proceedings as the two leaders accused Russia of using its energy exports to Europe as a weapon to undermine public support for Ukraine on the continent.

They went on to underscore the importance of weaning Germany and the rest of Europe off Russian oil and gas over the short term, and transitioning away from such energy sources over the medium-to-long term.

The federal government is ready to do its part by making it easier for companies to get regulatory approval to transport liquified natural gas from other parts of Canada to the east coast for export to Germany, Trudeau told reporters as Scholz looked on.

“From the government’s standpoint, easing the processes ⁠— because of the difficulty that Germany is facing ⁠— to make sure that we can move through regulatory hurdles more quickly is something we're willing to do,” he said.

Yet the prime minister suggested it will ultimately be up to industry to determine whether it makes business sense to invest in the facilities and other infrastructure needed to transport Canadian gas to Europe.

“There are a number of potential projects, including one in Saint John, and some others that are on the books for which there has never been a strong business case because of the distance from the gas fields,” he said.

“We are looking right now ⁠— and companies are looking ⁠— at whether or not, in the new context, it makes it a worthwhile business case, to make those investments. ... It needs to make sense for Germany to be receiving LNG directly from the east coast.”

Canada could also export its LNG to other markets around the world and in the process free up gas from other sources that could be used by Germany and Europe, Trudeau added.

“We are certainly aware that even as the world needs to decarbonize and get off fossil fuels, there is a need right now to counter the energy crisis created by Russia,” he said.

Canadian Gas Association president and CEO Timothy Egan welcomed the prime minister’s talk about easing regulatory hurdles for industry, which he described as critical for moving ahead with various projects.

“I don't think industry is looking for any financial support from government, but it is looking to see the regulatory process clarified and made more expeditious,” he said.

“The prime minister indicated a willingness to make the regulatory process quicker and clearer. That’s enormous.”

Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland first raised the idea of government action to make it easier for LNG exports from Canada while visiting Saint John in early July, where she met with representatives from across industry.

Yet while the government has since held a handful of meetings and consultations, Egan said much engagement is needed.

“We certainly have been in touch with Natural Resources Canada on various occasions about the situation, and we know that the government is meeting with European counterparts,” he added.

“But I would say that we've had more overtures from European governments and industry ... than we have from our own government.”

During Monday’s news conference, both Trudeau and Scholz underscored the need to transition from fossil fuels clean energy over the medium-to-long term. The two leaders are expected to sign a deal on hydrogen later this week.

Yet Scholz painted a picture of Germans taking extreme measures to shore up their energy supplies in the short term to survive the coming winter as the country struggles with a decline in Russian energy exports.

Russia has cut gas flows in the Nord Stream 1 pipeline to Germany to 20 per cent of capacity and recently announced it would shut down the line entirely for three days at the end of the month, citing the need for unscheduled maintenance.

Measures taken by Germany include massive new investments in ports and pipelines to receive gas from Norway, the Netherlands and other parts of Europe, and a reversal on recent moves to phase out oil and coal use in the country.

The leaders also defended Canada’s decision to grant a permit allowing gas turbines repaired in Montreal to be sent back to Russian state-owned energy giant Gazprom, which operates the Nord Stream 1 pipeline.

Ukraine has criticized Trudeau and his government for agreeing last month to Germany’s request to exempt Siemens Canada from sanctions against Russia so it could return a turbine for use in the pipeline.

The turbine had been under repairs at Siemens’ Montreal facility, the only location in the world capable of maintaining the equipment. It was delivered to Germany and was supposed to go to Russia from there, but Russian authorities have refused to accept it.

Trudeau and Scholz accused Russia of trying to use the issue as a cover for cutting gas exports. They also said Moscow was trying to pit Canada and Germany against each other, and divert public anger at the resulting increase in energy prices away from itself.

Yet while they claimed to have effectively called Russia's bluff, as evidenced by Gazprom's refusal to take the turbine, Trudeau sidestepped questions about whether his government would now block the import, repair and return of five other turbines.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 22, 2022.

Lee Berthiaume and Virginie Ann, The Canadian Press
Adam Pankratz: Natural gas is the elephant in the room that Trudeau and Scholz are ignoring

Special to National Post - 

This week, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz is visiting Canada. Many items will be on his agenda with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau but one critical item is blatantly missing: liquified natural gas. Failure to discuss an LNG deal during this meeting is a further demonstration of a wanton and failing energy policy from both sides. The only question is, who is worse? The one whose country is currently paying €250 per megawatt hour for gas (more than 10 times what it was last year) or the one whose country is sitting on trillions of cubic meters of the stuff, yet can’t get it to market?


© Provided by National PostPipes at a natural gas plant near Fort St. John, B.C., Thursday, Oct. 11, 2018.

Canada’s proven gas reserves as of 2020 amounted to 2.4 trillion (yes, with a “T”) cubic meters of gas. That’s 83 trillion cubic feet if you prefer imperial. We also produce 165 billion cubic meters of gas annually, making us the fifth largest producer of gas in the world. Yet, despite our incredible reserves and large production we fail time and time again to get market value for our product.

Current price differentials in the LNG market boggle the mind. AECO, the Alberta or Canadian reference price, has fluctuated between $4 and $5 per gigajoule in recent months, most recently dropping below $2. They could even turn negative in September. Meanwhile, in the United States, the reference price of Henry Hub currently sits at a touch over $12 or US$9/MMBtu. While this differential may be enough to drive Canadian producers mad, it pales in comparison to what Europe is paying for gas with current prices over the equivalent of $90/MMBtu.

The reason for this differential blowout is simple: Canada lacks the infrastructure to get our gas to the world. With Canada’s LNG unable to be exported due to lack of pipelines and terminals our gas is held captive by our own domestic market. Our LNG should be transported all over the world to get the highest price but right now it remains largely trapped within our borders. Since Russia’s Ukraine invasion oil and gas prices worldwide have risen enormously. But in Europe, gas prices have soared more than anything else because of the lack of supply options other than Russia. Europe deserves heavy blame for their lack of gas substitutes and Europeans will suffer heavily this winter because of bad political judgement, particularly in Germany.

Canada may not have been able to affect European decision making but we do control our own destiny. Regardless, in past years, governments have shirked and ignored the huge LNG opportunity for enviro-political gain.

In British Columbia, there were multiple LNG projects proposed in recent years, but ultimately only one, with much delay and struggle — LNG Canada — has made it through the province’s byzantine regulatory and consultation process. Still not complete, LNG Canada will allow Canadian gas to access the world market for the first time, ever. On the East Coast there is no LNG export terminal, despite multiple attempts to build one. In February, Ottawa nixed Énergie Saguenay’s proposed LNG facility, which had been in the works since 2014. It was crushed just in time to watch Russia invade Ukraine two weeks later and use gas as an economic weapon.

We can bowdlerize with polite insinuations of a missed LNG opportunity, but the reality is that Canada’s performance on LNG has been short-sighted, ideological, unrealistic and foolish. There has been little concrete leadership by politicians who have more broadly preferred a starry-eyed, half baked approach to LNG policy discussions. Oil and gas are not disappearing anytime soon and it’s time Canadian policy started to reflect that reality.

Even those resistant to oil should be able to recognize that LNG is the next enormous economic opportunity for Canada. LNG is the bridge fuel which can replace coal, while producing at least 40 per cent fewer emissions than coal and about 25 per cent less than oil. This gives us a cleaner burning alternative as we transition (over decades) towards fully renewable energy. If there is a more economically and environmentally compelling argument in the world today, I have not seen it.

But there is also a moral and societal argument here in Canada as well. That argument is the huge economic opportunity LNG represents for First Nations communities in Canada, and particularly in British Columbia. LNG Canada and the Coastal Gas Link (CGL) will bring in billions of dollars in royalties and jobs to these communities. Multiple Indigenous leaders have spoken on the importance of this issue for their communities, including Crystal Smith of the Haisla Nation, Karen Ogen-Toews, CEO of the First Nations LNG Alliance, and Ellis Ross, Haisla member and MLA for Skeena.

LNG is here to stay as an important energy source for longer than many unrealistic politicians would like to admit. For over a century we have been using fossil fuels to grow and prosper; that will not change overnight. LNG will have a decades-long run ahead as a reliable, transition fuel. This is an opportunity Canada cannot miss. We must develop, in conjunction with indigenous communities, more pipelines, more gas wells and more LNG export terminals so that our precious resources find equitable prices in the growing world market. Any politician who can’t find space for an LNG discussion in their agenda today is woefully failing their citizens.

Adam Pankratz is a lecturer at the University of British Columbia’s Sauder School of Business and is on the board of directors of Rokmaster Resources.
WHO Reports Breakthrough Monkeypox Cases, Says Vaccines Are 'Not a Silver Bullet'

Vanessa Etienne - 5h ago

The World Health Organization (WHO) has revealed there have been a number of breakthrough cases of monkeypox after preliminary reports detail the efficacy of the vaccine.


Cynthia S. Goldsmith, Russell Regner/CDC via AP Monkeypox virions

In a press briefing, Dr. Rosamund Lewis, WHO's technical lead for monkeypox, discussed reports of breakthrough monkeypox cases in people who received a prophylaxis vaccine following exposure to the virus.

"We have known from the beginning that this vaccine would not be a silver bullet, that it would not meet all the expectations that are being put on it and that we don't have firm efficacy data or effectiveness data in this context," Lewis explained.

"The fact that we're beginning to see some breakthrough cases is also really important information because it tells us that the vaccine is not 100% effective in any given circumstance, whether preventive or post-exposure," she continued. "We cannot expect 100% effectiveness at the moment based on this emerging information."

Related video: Monkeypox vaccinations proceed despite scientists' debate
Duration 1:50 View on Watch

Monkeypox can be prevented with the Jynneos smallpox vaccine, which can also be effective after a person is infected, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Health officials noted that the efficacy data on the vaccine is not surprising because a study from the 1980s found that the shots could provide about 85% protection against monkeypox.

"What we're seeing are breakthrough cases, which are not really surprises, but it reminds us that vaccine is not a silver bullet, that every person who feels that they are a risk, and appreciates their own level of risk, and wishes to lower their own level of risk have many interventions at their disposal, which includes vaccination where available but also protection from activities where they may be at risk," Lewis said.

Monkeypox spreads primarily through skin-to-skin contact, direct contact with bodily fluids or lesions, and can also be transmitted by respiratory droplets. While the respiratory transmission may sound similar to COVID-19, monkeypox does not spread nearly as easily as the coronavirus.

The CDC states that individuals can protect themselves from the virus by avoiding skin-to-skin contact with people who have a rash that looks like monkeypox, avoiding contact with objects and materials that a person with monkeypox has used, and washing hands often.

As of Friday, there are 41,358 confirmed global cases of monkeypox across 94 countries, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The United States counts more infections from the virus than any other country in the world with 14,115.
Will climate investments work — or open a door for fossil fuel defenders?

Noah Gordon, opinion contributor - THE HILL

For the first time in its history, Congress has passed a comprehensive climate bill. The so-called Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) that was just signed into law will make gigantic investments in low-carbon energy, making access to lower emission energy cheaper for people all over the world. What’s more, modelers expect the bill to put the United States within striking distance of its Paris Agreement emissions-cutting target of 50 percent (on 2005 levels) by 2030.


Will climate investments work — or open a door for fossil fuel defenders?

The U.S. Congress finally acting to slow the climate crisis is a really big deal. And these investments will set up a new period of U.S. climate politics, centered not on whether financing climate action is worth doing, but whether it is working.

In order to explain, it’s worth reviewing the science of how greenhouse gases heat up the planet and when global warming might stop. Paris Agreement signatories pledged to try to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) — or ideally to the safer but now essentially unachievable target of 1.5 degrees Celsius. According to the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), limiting warming to 2 Celsius requires global greenhouse gas emissions to reach net-zero in around 2100, with emissions peaking by 2025 and then declining steadily over the following seventy years.

Here is the crucial point: Global warming does not begin to stop until emissions reach net-zero. After that point, global temperatures should stabilize within a few years, as methane disappears from the atmosphere and the land and oceans absorb more carbon dioxide, although it would take several centuries for these natural processes alone to start cooling the Earth, as the scientist Zeke Hausfather has written in Carbon Brief. So, everything that people do on the way to net-zero — say, the United States cutting its emissions in half — merely slows down the rate at which the planet is warming. While temperature change can be stopped relatively quickly after emissions hit zero, other aspects of the climate system will unfortunately have suffered more committed or “baked-in” damage: after net-zero, melting glaciers would keep melting, and sea levels would keep rising, likely for centuries.

In short, there is a lag between cause and effect, which scientists call “hysteresis.” Think of the delay between turning down a thermostat and the room actually reaching your desired temperature. In U.S. climate politics, this lag will lead to some serious irritation — if not hysteria.

That’s partly because people overstate how important the U.S. is to the trajectory of the global climate: after the Senate passed the IRA on Aug. 7, the Financial Times editorial board wrote that “the planet might have a future after all,” while Paul Krugman’s New York Times op-ed asked whether Democrats had just “saved civilization”. The U.S., though, is responsible for only about 13 percent (and falling) of global greenhouse gas emissions.

But it’s also because even the most climate-conscious Americans underestimate the extent to which the effort to mitigate climate change is more of an Ironman triathlon than a marathon, let alone a sprint. The IRA contains about $400 billion in climate and energy spending over 10 years. Regardless of how effective those investments are, there is zero chance that the rate of global warming even slows down until the end of President Biden’s current term. Again, even in a best-case scenario where the climate bill helped jumpstart a global transition and put the world on track to miraculously hold warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius, humans would not stop adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere before 2060. Until then, the fires and droughts that already have a majority of Americans worried about global warming are expected to keep getting worse.

While the climate bill gives us a running start, we know one climate package won’t be enough. What does this mean for the politics of climate change in the long term? In the U.S. debate, defenders of fossil fuels will probably switch to new rhetoric. Once denying the reality of human-caused climate change became passé, even gauche, these politicians started pointing out that other countries would simply catch a free ride on the American mitigation train. In criticizing the Green New Deal, for example, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) argued that the climate package would “tie America’s hands for no benefit, while China and our international competitors go roaring by.”

Now that the U.S. is taking action, and China’s incredible buildout of renewables has it on pace to peak emissions by 2025, climate obstructionists will have to take a new tack. “Sure, climate change made those floods worse,” they might say, “but all these expensive climate programs still aren’t worth it. It’s not just that other countries keep emitting more and more, it’s that all our emission cuts do nothing to stop floods,” floods like the ones that killed dozens in McConnell’s home state of Kentucky in early August.

In countries like Germany that have long had a serious national climate policy, such deflection of responsibility on the grounds that domestic policy “affects only 2 percent of emissions” is a common rhetorical tactic. While the IRA does not contain some of the climate policies that might be most invidious to the average consumer, such as a carbon tax, it will still lead to noticeable changes in American life as new government-subsidized wind turbines and transmission lines go up around the country.

For those who support the climate bill and climate mitigation, it will be important to emphasize that things are getting better even when they don’t seem to be. That messaging needs to start now. The day that the U.S. keeps its Paris Agreement promise and cuts emissions by half will be momentous, but not because it immediately averts a heatwave the following summer. Rather, it will be momentous because it will avoid future emissions that could have damaged the planet for generations to come.

Supporters of climate action have to be prepared for the decades-long period where climate policy and green technology gets really good, but climate impacts stay bad. In the meantime, countries can adapt so that the impacts are less harmful, and look forward to a future where net-negative emissions allow humans to start trying to put the climate genie back in the bottle.

Noah Gordon is a fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace where his research focuses on climate change and energy policy.

Uranus Retrograde Is Here To Change Everything

Elizabeth Gulino - 
 Refinery29

Another day, another retrograde. From August 24 until January 22, 2023, the Planet of Revolution will be wrapped up in a backwards dance. Although Uranus retrogrades every year around this time and we’ve experienced the planetary backwards motion in Taurus before, it’s still a transit that triggers some major reevaluating. Are you ready for it?



Uranus is an outer planet that affects our long-term goals. Since it stays in a sign for around seven years, we’re often focusing on the same themes for that entire time. For this transit in particular, Uranus’s influence is a bit serious on a collective level. “It brings change on a grand scale,” says Lisa Stardust, astrologer and author of The Love Deck. “When in Taurus, its least favorite sign to be in, it creates change around the foundations that we have built our lives on. Structures fall, the way we invest our money and source our food is radically different than before, and relationships evolve and grow in different ways.”

Mainly, retrogrades affect us on a more personal level, due to the transit’s reflective nature. Uranus is often associated with sudden breakthroughs and shocking revelations or events, but during its retrograde, “We’re choosing to reflect on the change that’s taken place in our lives over the past few months and what changes we need to make moving forward,” says astrologer Stephanie Campos. She urges us to create a cosmic game plan and ask ourselves, “How do we interact with change? Do we welcome it? Are we terrified of it? What changes have we been avoiding? How will applying some of those changes bring us closer to the life we truly desire to live?”

This is the time to dive headlong into our deep feelings, according Iva Naskova, astrologer at the Nebula app. “Uranus retrograde allows us to rethink and reflect on our goals and aspirations and challenges us to take a different approach, and it is more likely for us all to think and act a bit differently or in more creative and unconventional ways,” she says. If something hasn’t been working out for you this year, take note and change your direction. Although scary, change can often be the catalyst we need for a transformation.

Narayana Montúfar, senior astrologer for Astrology.com and author of Moon Signs: Unlock Your Inner Luminary Power, says that as Uranus retrogrades, its erratic energy diminishes a bit, which in turn allows us to really integrate changes that have been taking place into our lives. “If certain events took us by surprise this year, they could begin to make much more sense,” she says. “Uranus is the planet of creative brilliance, but its influence can sometimes be too much to digest when it is direct.” This retrograde can be great news, actually, and Montúfar says it’ll be especially so for those who have experienced significant change and any big life events this year. Although change is inevitable, big switches will happen at a much slower, more digestible pace during this time, which may save all of us a lot of turmoil.

This year in particular has been an incredibly active one for Uranus, mainly due to its connections with Saturn and the Lunar North Node of Destiny. “The foundations of our lives have been collapsing to make room for the creation of new structures that allow for more freedom and creativity — but the process hasn’t been easy,” Montúfar says. “We have been standing in this liminal space between the past and the future, sometimes resisting moving forward.”

And with Uranus retrograding, it will move closer to its square with Saturn, according to psychic astrologer Leslie Hale. “Uranus square Saturn is an intense transit prone to unexpected events that will affect the collective and us personally,” she says. “The peak period is mid-September through mid-October. While the results may play out for some time, this will be the final clash between these planets for years to come.” If a major change occurs under this aspect, Hale assures us that it will ultimately be for the better — even if it doesn’t feel that way at the time.

Like we said before, change can be scary — but it’s also necessary. Use the vibes of this retrograde to your advantage and switch it up. It’s daring to do something different, and may just turn your luck around for the better.
I CHING

49, Radical Change


The revolution in hexagram 49 has deep roots. In hexagram 47, you experience Oppression, and turn inward to reconnect with the Well. And drinking from the unchanging source creates the imperative for change in the outer world. ‘The way of the Well does not allow not changing radically.’ Change is essential, to make the forms and patterns of life into a better Vessel. As Jack Balkin puts it, ‘You must change your life in order to make it cohere with who you are now.’

‘Radical change: putting away the past.
The Vessel: grasping renewal.’

The Vessel, Hexagram 50, securely encloses a sacred space where the energies of life can blend, interact and create new substance. Such renewal is not possible unless the old patterns of reaction have first been completely eradicated. Before renewal, revolution.

The authors of the I Ching knew this truth through a historical example: the Zhou people’s conquest of the decadent Shang dynasty. This would have been unthinkably Radical Change, to overthrow a dynasty whose power had been guaranteed by Heaven for far longer than living memory. But the revolution showed that Heaven’s mandate could change. The power to rule had left one dynasty and moved to another, like a snake changing its skin. This is the key Change of the I Ching – sudden, total, leaving no familiar ‘handles’ to grasp – the kind we attempt to map out and understand through divination.

In divination, Radical Change means very much what it says: the complete overthrow of old ways of understanding and ordering life. The Judgement says that there is truth and presence on Si day, the day of the snake: it is a time to shed your old identity, to try on new ways of being and of relating to others. The old character for Radical Change shows an animal skin: an identity and power the shaman could put on with the skin.

The new power can come from the new skin, or it might demand one: you cannot pour new wine into old vessels. The trigrams, fire in the lake, show the same idea in elemental form, ‘changing inner awareness that melts away obsolete outer form.’ (Karcher, Total I Ching) The new clarity of vision has to find expression; fire shines through the water, like the naked intelligence in the eyes animating the mask.

Tradition tells that water and fire stand in opposition here, ‘mutually suspended’ – holding one another in check. The same two trigrams in Hexagram 38, Opposition, pull away from one another; here, they are on collision course. A clash of objectives – unlike diverging visions – has to mean radical change.

In practice, the key issue in revolution is one of timing: charting the dynamics of the momentary equilibrium, finding the moment when it can or should be broken. What is ‘your own day’, when there will be truth and confidence?

The Image describes the work of finding the right moment:

‘At the centre of the lake is fire. Radical change.
In the same way, the noble one calculates the heavenly signs and clarifies the seasons.’

Wu Jing Nuan introduced me to the idea that this is about astrology. It’s one thing to rely on one’s intuition to know when to sow and reap, but what if the flowers are late or the birds sing early? The stars are a more constant, objective way to know the time. Long term, repeated patterns and objective analysis create greater security than just trusting your perceptions and intuitions, moment to moment.

Such understanding allowed the authors of the Commentary on the Judgement to fit unthinkable change into a greater scheme of things:

‘Heaven and earth undergo Radical Change and the four seasons are accomplished.
Tang and Wu changed the mandate in accord with Heaven.’

Wu founded the Zhou dynasty; Tang had founded the Shang. The chaos, upheaval and bloodshed were part of the natural order, though on a huge scale: seasons that might take many centuries to turn, but still seasons.

This may be the kind of understanding we look for when we divine – a sense of perspective, of over-arching stories that relativise our own traumas. We contain the changes within narrative and ritual – but can we be sure, even then? The core of Radical Change (its nuclear hexagram) is Hexagram 44, Coupling: the arrival of a new force with the power to overturn the old order. It shows the inner possibility that with Radical Change, you may be unleashing powers of change that you never intended or predicted.




"The most ridiculously detailed" photo of the moon has arrived

Li Cohen - 8h ago

A viral post has revealed an incredible new image of the moon – but it wasn't captured by NASA. "The most ridiculously detailed" image of Earth's lunar neighbor was a two-year project captured by two astrophotographers.


© Andrew McCarthy/Instagram300227995-149261601060767-189191177030395799-n.jpg

The 174-megapixel image, which shows the moon's colors, craters and glowing aura in stunning detail, was first revealed on Reddit on Saturday. Through Reddit and Instagram, Andrew McCarthy, known for his breathtaking astrophotography skills, teamed up with planetary scientist and fellow photographer Connor Matherne, who has been acclaimed for his striking and vibrant photos of galaxies and nebulae.

The two previously worked together to create an incredible glowing and detailed image of the moon.

In an Instagram post, McCarthy called their final product "the most ridiculously detailed moon image we could come up with." The photo, named "The Hunt for Artemis," is also a tribute to NASA's Artemis I mission, an uncrewed flight test that, according to the space agency, "will provide a foundation for human deep exploration and demonstrate our commitment and capability to return humans to the moon and extend beyond."

"In 9 days, a human-rated lunar rocket will launch from Cape Canaveral in Florida," McCarthy wrote on Instagram over the weekend, "demonstrating our capability for manned lunar missions for the first time in 50 years."

In the tribute image, the pair managed to capture significant color data that highlights the reds, grays, blues and browns that help make the moon so unique. Without Matherne's ability to capture this data, McCarthy said on Reddit, the image would have been a "dreary gray."

"The color in this image is real, but presented with increased saturation so it is easily visible to our eyes," he wrote. "The reddish tones demonstrate areas rich in iron and feldspar, while the bluish areas are spots where the regolith is rich in titanium. Oxidization from influence from Earth's atmosphere makes the colors appear like they do."

McCarthy told NPR that the project is "assembled like a mosaic."

"Each tile is made up of thousands of photos," he said.

The duo told NPR that in a single evening, McCarthy shot over 200,000 photos of the moon from Arizona while Matherne shot 500 of his own from Louisiana. They stacked the images and spent nine months perfecting it to get the final result.

Matherne said the image is the highest resolution moon photo he has ever taken. He and McCarthy are selling prints of the image on McCarthy's website.

"I always love getting a chance to collaborate with great friends, and I can't wait to see what we come up with next," he said.
Nasa’s James Webb telescope reveals astonishing new picture of Jupiter

Andrew Griffin - 4h ago - THE INDEPENDENT

NASA Quietly Releases Terrestrial Test Photos of Jupiter Captured by the James Webb Space Telescope
Duration 1:04 View on Watch

Nasa’s James Webb Space Telescope has revealed astonishing new pictures of Jupiter.

The images show our near neighbourhood in precise detail, and scientists help that it could further reveal what is happening on the chaotic planet.

Its vast storms, swirling winds and blazing auroras are all visible in the image, which was taken from the telescope’s near-infrared camera (NIR).

That camera has three infrared filters that are able to showcase details of the planet. But it means that its images must be mapped into visible light, and the blue on the image is the shorter wavelengths.

The image also includes fuzzy spots, likely galaxies that have snuck into the image (NASA, ESA, Jupiter ERS Team; image processing by Ricardo Hueso (UPV/EHU) and Judy Schmidt)

It revealed one image that showed Jupiter as it floats in space, surrounded by a background of stars. The widefield view shows not only Jupiter but also its faint rings, as well as two tiny moons called Amalthea and Adrastea.

The image also includes fuzzy spots, likely galaxies that have snuck into the image.

The new images were actually stitched together from a number of images of Jupiter, taken from images in July. Scientists working on the telescope worked with a citizen scientist called Judy Schmidt to process them into one of the newly released images.

The ‘great red spot’ can also be seen, though it is a bright white in the image itself (NASA, ESA, Jupiter ERS Team; image processing by Judy Schmidt)

The processing used a variety of filters to help the specific parts of Jupiter’s composition shine. The auroras at the north and south pole shine bright in a redder filter; the hazes around those same areas are lit up by a yellow and green one that picks them out as they swirl; and a blue filter helps show the light that is reflecting off a main cloud.
In the image the “great red spot” can also be seen, though it is a bright white in the image itself. That is because of the large amount of light that is reflecting off it and other clouds.

While much of the excitement about the James Webb Space Telescope was about the way it would allow us to peer deeper into the universe than ever before, it has already been sending back new images of objects that are much closer to home.

Some of the first images to come back from the telescope showed Jupiter and its Moon Europe, for example.

But the telescope has also been busy looking deep into our cosmos. The first image it sent back to Earth was the deepest image ever taken of our universe – showing its oldest and furthest recesses.