Latest news with #KatherineCalvin
1722066109-0%2FBeFunky-collage%5D-(58)1722066109-0.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
Express Tribune
11-03-2025
- Science
- Express Tribune
NASA closes offices, cuts staff as part of Trump administration's cost-cutting measures
The NASA logo is seen at Kennedy Space Center ahead of the NASA/SpaceX launch of a commercial crew mission to the International Space Station in Cape Canaveral, Florida, U.S., April 16, 2021. PHOTO:REUTERS Listen to article NASA has confirmed the closure of three key offices and the elimination of 23 positions as part of an ongoing workforce reduction initiative under an executive order issued by the Trump administration. The affected offices include the Office of Chief Scientist, the Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy, and the Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA) branch within the Office of Diversity and Equal Opportunity. In a statement released on Monday, a NASA spokesperson explained that the layoffs are part of the agency's compliance with the Trump administration's directive to optimise government operations and reduce costs. "A small number of individuals received notification today they are part of NASA's reduction in force (RIF). Those employees may opt for Voluntary Early Retirement or complete the RIF process," the spokesperson said. The Office of Chief Scientist, which advises NASA's leadership on scientific programmes, and the Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy, which was created to provide evidence-based advice, have both been central to the agency's operations. The DEIA branch was responsible for advancing diversity and inclusion efforts across the agency. Katherine Calvin, NASA's current chief scientist, is among those impacted by the cuts. The position has been a central advisory role within NASA for decades, though it was temporarily eliminated between 2005 and 2011. NASA's acting administrator, Janet Petro, informed employees about the closures in an email on Monday, stating that the move aligns with the Trump administration's efforts to streamline the federal bureaucracy, including cuts to space-related departments. The agency's policy and diversity offices are the latest to be affected by these efforts, which have been driven in part by Elon Musk's advocacy for government efficiency. This restructuring follows a broader trend in federal agencies, with other departments such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) also experiencing significant layoffs. Recently, 23 employees from NOAA's Office of Space Commerce were let go, though some were reinstated after pushback. Additionally, reports suggest the Trump administration plans to cut funding for NASA's science programmes by up to 50% in the next fiscal year, a move that could severely affect the agency's long-term research and exploration goals. NASA's future remains uncertain as more workforce reductions and changes are expected in the coming weeks. The upcoming budget request from the Trump administration will likely provide further insight into the future direction of the space agency.
The Guardian
11-03-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
As Trump attacks US science agencies, ex-Tropical Cyclone Alfred ushers in a fresh wave of climate denial in Australia
It's not a good time for climate science. The Trump administration has sacked more than a thousand staff from the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the country's leading agency for weather forecasting and climate science, potentially damaging its ability to do lifesaving work forecasting hurricanes and other extreme weather events. The New York Times reported plans are under way to fire another 1,000. If true, that will take the cuts to about 20% of the workforce. On Monday, it was announced Nasa was axing its chief scientist, Katherine Calvin, who had been appointed to lead the agency's work on climate change. In trademark Donald Trump/Elon Musk style, there appears little care or sense in where cuts have been made. It's destruction for destruction's sake, with tens of thousands of peer-reviewed scientific papers underpinning the understanding of climate science dismissed as a 'hoax' or, somehow, 'woke'. As in most areas, what happens in the US on forecasting and science capability will have an impact beyond its borders. In Australia, the past week has seen a fresh wave of climate denial as ex-Tropical Cyclone Alfred approached and hit the southern Queensland coast. News Corp outlets, in particular, have run straw man arguments attacking people that have forcefully linked the storm to the climate crisis. Some commentators have pointed out that southern Queensland has had cyclones before. Others have suggested there is uncertainty in the data about the pace and way in which they are changing, and that climate change didn't 'cause' Alfred. Well, yes. That's all correct, of course, but hardly the point. What they mostly haven't said is that the ocean and atmosphere are demonstrably warmer than even just a few years ago. Or that this means the most intense storms formed in warmer conditions carry more energy and more water. Or that the conditions under which tropical cyclones can form are moving south as the planet heats up. Tropical cyclones can take shape when the sea is 26.5C. Temperatures at that level are not enough for a cyclone to form – a range of climatic conditions have to occur – but they are being reached and sustained more often in places further away from the equator. As the cliche goes, the dice are increasingly loaded towards an extreme event being worse than in the past. We have loaded the dice by burning fossil fuels in greater and greater quantities. They have been the primary driver of a more than 50% increase in the amount of heat-trapping carbon dioxide in the atmosphere since pre-industrial times. The evidence is that this is making tropical cyclones less frequent but more intense. There is data suggesting they also tend to last longer. Greater intensity plus time equals heightened risk of damage and casualties. It doesn't mean that every cyclone or extreme storm will be more damaging than in the past. It does mean that when one comes, the potential for it to carry enough energy to wreak significant havoc is rising, not falling. The extra energy in a cyclone has a number. Nearly 200 years ago, physicists found that if air warms by 1C it can hold about 7% more water vapour and dump more rain. It has proven remarkably correct. What they didn't know is that it was only part of the story – that in the case of some particularly strong storms in a warmer climate there are further multiplying factors in the atmosphere that can increase their power and lead to a 30-40% increase in localised rainfall intensity. Yes, due to climate change. Pointing this out isn't a 'political lecture', as the Liberal National party senator Matt Canavan suggested last week. Nor is a form of hysteria or an expression of religious belief, as an overexcited Sky News commentator claimed. It is highlighting facts that are relevant to how we might prepare for what lies ahead. This might all feel like a statement of the painfully obvious, given the years of scientific inquiry and reporting. For those who feel that way: I hear you. Debate over the climate crisis can seem stuck in an eternal bad faith rut, even as attempts across the community to address it speed up. But let's consider some more facts. If you're after a clear picture on the physical science you could do worse than listen to Prof Mark Howden, the director of the Australian National University's Institute for Climate, Energy & Disaster Solutions and a vice-chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In a state of the climate address last month – his final in the role before stepping down later this year – he set out an extraordinary list of evidence. Some of it is reasonably well known. Best we can tell, global CO2 emissions still increased last year – by 0.8%. If we want to put an optimistic spin on it we might describe this as basically flatlining. But they're not coming down yet. Sign up to Clear Air Australia Adam Morton brings you incisive analysis about the politics and impact of the climate crisis after newsletter promotion Some of it is less well understood. Particularly: there had been a 'massive step-change up' in warming since June 2023, when temperatures vaulted well beyond what was already a historically high level. Scientists don't exactly know why this happened. Howden described the past 18 months as 'mind-boggling' and 'like more than a decade of temperature increase in two years'. Scientists do know the past decade has been the hottest 10 years on record. They do know that every day globally in 2024 was at least 1.25C hotter than pre-industrial levels, and three quarters were 1.5C hotter. And they do know feedback loops are making things worse. Howden gave two examples: melting of Arctic ice and tundra and massive wildfires. Both release large amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, worsening the climate crisis, which in turn make large-scale melting and burning more likely. And so on. Howden made a couple of overarching points. One was a barely veiled message for the political class, and perhaps those charged with holding them to account. He said that Australia had the resources and means to become a global leader in zero-emissions solutions if it had the will, but stressed: 'We have to put to bed this idea that we're tracking OK and having some aspirational target of net zero by 2050 will somehow make us avoid 1.5C [of heating above pre-industrial levels].' The second wasn't directed at the columnists and coal bosses who would use Alfred as the latest front in an ideological war, but could have been. 'If this isn't certain enough,' Howden asked, 'how much certainty do you need? What's the evidence base that tips you over into taking this seriously?' Good question. Adam Morton is Guardian Australia's climate and environment editor
Axios
10-03-2025
- Science
- Axios
NASA eliminates chief scientist role, other offices
NASA has cut its office of the chief scientist and its Office of Science, Policy, and Strategy, among other entities, the agency said in an internal email that Axios has viewed. Why it matters: Eliminating these offices comes ahead of potentially deep cuts to the agency's science programs. Katherine Calvin, a climate scientist, had the role of chief scientist. Questions have arisen about the fate of NASA science programs, particularly its Earth science work studying human-caused climate change. Calvin has also held the dual title of NASA's senior climate adviser. Zoom in: In the email, Acting NASA Administrator Janet Petro said the cuts were part of a "phased" reduction in force, or RIF. The reduction came in response to instructions from President Trump's executive orders and in conjunction with the Office of Personnel Management and Office of Management and Budget. Another office cut is the Office of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Accessibility branch of the agency's Office of Diversity and Equal Opportunity. Around 20 people were affected by the cuts. NASA spokesperson Cheryl Warner told Axios: "To optimize our workforce, and in compliance with an Executive Order, NASA is beginning its phased approach to a reduction in force, known as a RIF." The spokesperson confirmed the offices that would be closed and their workforce let go. The intrigue: The NASA office of the chief scientist is responsible for providing "independent assessment and advice to the Administrator on matters related to NASA science," and leads the development of the agency's science strategy. The chief scientist also plays a top role in setting the agency's scientific integrity policies. The office of science, policy and strategy is home to NASA's chief technologist and chief economist, and was created in 2021 to provide evidence-based strategic advice to agency leadership. What they're saying: "Change of this magnitude is never easy, but our strength comes to our shared commitment to our mission and to each other," Petro wrote in the email. In a post on X, Harvard and Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics external relations lead Grant Tremblay sharply criticized the moves. "NASA is small, but it is arguably the most legendary and globally beloved agency in American history. Its gutting has begun, & the cuts to come are so massive that we won't recognize it in a year," he wrote. Editor's note: This story has been updated with additional reporting.
