plant lover, cookie monster, shoe fiend
20797 stories
·
19 followers

Satellite operators are in panic mode due to a worsening launch crisis - Ars Technica

1 Share

This should be a golden era of launch.

During the last three years, an average of 270 orbital rockets have launched from Earth, a more than threefold increase from only a decade ago. By every metric available, the launch industry is crushing it: Prices have never been more competitive, launches never more frequent, and access to space never more rapid.

Paradoxically, though, there is a growing crunch in launch availability.

As part of his job as the director of research at Quilty Space, Caleb Henry speaks with satellite operators all the time. And he is hearing a constant and increasingly loud refrain from companies that want to put stuff into space.

“What we have is an industry in panic,” Henry said.

Anecdotes abound. A Canadian satellite company, Telesat, recently received inquiries from other companies asking if they would consider sharing some of the 11 Falcon 9 launches Telesat has booked for its new constellation. (Sorry, no, is the reply). The Amazon LEO constellation has had to throttle back production of satellites because few of the dozens of launches it booked half a decade ago are ready. And during an earnings call last Monday, officials from AST SpaceMobile said launch availability was now the pacing item for deploying its constellation.

With a growing number of constellations big and small, there is a huge and growing demand signal. The Commercial Space Federation predicts demand for thousands of satellite launches annually in less than a decade. Analysys Mason forecasted that more than 37,000 satellites will need to be launched between 2023 and 2033. Henry’s own firm, Quilty Space, has charted a change in the discussion from how many launch companies the US market can support to who can execute the fastest to meet surging satellite needs.

And if things are bad now, there are reasons to believe they may get even worse over the next two to four years.

Myriad factors are driving this crunch, but the principal concern of late has been SpaceX.

The company that is almost exclusively responsible for the dramatic increase in launch availability in the 2020s has signaled that it intends to wind down Falcon 9 operations as quickly as possible in favor of the larger Starship rocket. Some might see that as a good thing due to Starship’s enormous payload capacity. But there are growing concerns that SpaceX will largely focus on its own payloads—Starlink v3 satellites and orbital data centers—because of their potential to drive far greater profits. The Starship rocket’s PEZ satellite dispenser, optimized for Starlink, is an indication of the company’s priorities.

In financial documents, it’s clear that SpaceX views commercial launch as a rounding error compared to revenues from its own satellites in space. A majority of the company’s revenue ($4.3 billion out of $7.8 billion) during the second quarter of 2026 came from Starlink, whereas less than 12 percent was due to space services, of which commercial launch is but a fraction. This disparity is only likely to widen.

SpaceX has already moved beyond “peak” Falcon 9 operations. The company flew the rocket 165 times last year, and it will probably fly about 20 fewer missions this year. SpaceX is already making ground system changes to reflect these reductions.

The company’s president, Gwynne Shotwell, has previously said the operational lifetime of the Falcon 9 may end in 2030 or 2032. However, more recently, commercial satellite customers have been running into difficulties when trying to purchase a launch after 2028. One source said SpaceX has told the US government that it intends to end commercial launches after 2028 but will continue flying the Falcon 9 rocket for a limited number of federally contracted missions after that.

Whether or not these dates stick, it has become clear to commercial satellite operators that they can no longer reliably plan their future around the workhorse Falcon 9 rocket, creating a huge pain point for the commercial space industry in the United States and other Western countries.

This is because of an inescapable reality: Without SpaceX, the Western launch market would have been completely screwed over the last half-decade.

The war in Ukraine

On February 24, 2022, Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. This took Russian rockets off the table for Western countries, including European nations. Most immediately impacted was OneWeb, which lost some satellites already in Soyuz launch processing and eventually had to turn to a direct competitor, SpaceX and its Falcon 9 rocket, to complete its constellation.

The loss of the Soyuz and Proton rockets for Western commercial purposes came at the same time that two other leading providers were shutting down their older rockets for newer models. In Europe, the transition from the Ariane 5 to Ariane 6 rocket was underway. Across the pond, United Launch Alliance sought to end its dependence on Russian engines for the Atlas V rocket by migrating to the new Vulcan rocket.

Both projects had initially targeted completion by 2020, but by the time of the war’s outbreak, neither new vehicle was close to flying for the first time. Effectively, this meant that Arianespace and United Launch Alliance had a dwindling number of older rockets that were already spoken for.

Two solid-fueled boosters and a Vulcain 2.1 main engine propel the Ariane 6 rocket into the sky over French Guiana.
Two solid-fueled boosters and a Vulcain 2.1 main engine propel the Ariane 6 rocket into the sky over French Guiana. Credit: ESA – M. Pédoussaut

The war also offered a chance for two Asian nations with ties to the West, Japan and India, to step up. Both countries, with the H3 rocket in Japan and LVM3 in India, had been seeking to support the commercial satellite industry. But the H3’s debut slipped to 2023, and the first launch ended in failure. The eighth launch of the vehicle in 2025 was also a failure. To date, the vehicle has not been a commercial success and averages only a handful of launches a year. India’s LVM3 has launched even fewer times, just once or twice a year.

Amid all the opportunities to respond to Russia’s retreat from the Western market, only one company stood up. As Russian soldiers marched into Ukraine, SpaceX was beginning to perfect the reuse of the Falcon 9 rocket’s first stage. The company flew the Falcon rocket 31 times in 2021. By 2023, this number nearly tripled to 91 rockets.

As SpaceX’s main competitors struggled to bring new vehicles online, the Falcon 9 rocket flew and flew. It backstopped the entire Western Hemisphere’s launch needs, boosting everything from Europe’s prized Galileo satellites to NASA astronauts to Jeff Bezos’ Amazon LEO vehicles into orbit.

Waiting on Vulcan and New Glenn

The Ariane 6 rocket made its debut flight in July 2024 and has had a nice track record. But with a production goal of ten vehicles a year, the rocket won’t make a meaningful dent in the global need for launch capacity.

That left just two large rockets, the Vulcan vehicle and Blue Origin’s New Glenn booster, as the key vehicles to bring competition to SpaceX and help ease the growing demand for launch capacity in the mid-2020s.

The demand has long been evident. Even before these two rockets reached the launch pad, their launch manifests were booked up. In 2020, as part of the National Security Space Launch program, the US Space Force procured dozens of Vulcan launches for military missions. Two years later, Amazon purchased 38 Vulcan launches and options for up to 27 New Glenn flights for the Amazon program, which later would be renamed Amazon LEO. Both had more missions than they could fly for a while.

To compound problems, neither rocket has had an easy road from its debut (January 2024 for Vulcan, January 2025 for New Glenn) toward reaching a higher cadence.

Six years after the Space Force award, Vulcan has launched just two military missions. Vulcan has stumbled due to ongoing problems with the performance of its solid rocket boosters, which are provided by Northrop Grumman. The Pentagon has grown increasingly frustrated with the delays and has already moved several payloads previously intended for Vulcan onto SpaceX’s Falcon 9.

New Glenn got started even later than Vulcan, but it appeared to be reaching a nice cadence after successfully landing a first stage booster on the rocket’s second flight in November 2025. Unfortunately, tragedy struck in May of this year when the rocket exploded during a static fire test in Florida. This conflagration took out the vehicle’s only launch pad. New Glenn is therefore offline at least until the end of 2026, and despite the company’s professed optimism about returning to flight rapidly, probably into the early months of 2027.

So nearly half a decade after the onset of the Ukraine War, the Western launch market has not changed much. Ariane 6 has made a difference for Europe, but for the rest of the commercial launch industry, a holding pattern remains as Falcon 9 backstops all.

What about the next generation?

Vulcan and New Glenn are heavy lift rockets, but beyond them, a new generation of US medium-lift vehicles is in development.

The smallest is Stoke Space’s Nova rocket, which is intended to be fully reusable with a capacity of up to 7 tons to low-Earth orbit. Stoke’s chief executive, Andy Lapsa, has been careful not to release a target date publicly. However, during a recent visit to the company’s factory in Kent, Washington, company officials told Ars that they hope to deliver the flight version of the first stage to the launch site in Florida for testing this fall. A launch seems possible during the first half of 2027 if things go well.

Rocket Lab’s Neutron vehicle can loft 13 metric tons to low-Earth orbit in a reusable model and 15 tons in expendable. This vehicle’s launch target, which was once the year 2024, has slipped multiple times. According to its latest guidance, the company plans to ship Neutron to its launch site in Virginia before the end of this year. A debut launch in 2027 seems plausible but not guaranteed.

Since being acquired by Google billionaire Eric Schmidt, Relativity Space has been making steady progress on the large Terran R vehicle, which is intended to have a reusable mode lift capacity of 23.5 metric tons and 33.5 metric tons in expendable mode. Given recent progress with Terran R, a debut launch is plausible within the next 12 months, but since this is such a big rocket, there may be additional delays.

Rocket Lab’s Neutron rocket is shown in this rendering delivering a stack of satellites into orbit.
Rocket Lab’s Neutron rocket is shown in this rendering delivering a stack of satellites into orbit. Credit: Rocket Lab

Finally, Firefly and Northrop Grumman are developing the Eclipse rocket, which will have a lift capacity of 16 metric tons. Less is known about progress on this rocket, and it will most likely arrive later than the other vehicles on this list.

Even if one or more of these rockets makes its debut in 2027, none of the companies above have much experience with medium-lift growing pains. It will take time to scale up operations to produce more than a handful of launches per year. For this reason, Stoke’s vice president of business development, Devon Papandrew, thinks the launcher crisis will worsen in the next couple of years before conditions improve.

“I think it’s fair to say there’s more than a bit of a panic about the availability of launch,” Papandrew told Ars. “Even if the four medium-lift new entrants all achieve their goals in terms of flight success and cadence, it’s actually not going to make that much of a difference in demand right away. I’ve been saying for a while that I think 2028 is when this problem becomes really acute.”

So what will happen?

As the impending launch crisis comes to the industry, questions have begun to swirl about whether the federal government might intervene to keep the Falcon rockets flying. After all, NASA financially supported the development of the Falcon 9 and its launch pads to some degree through the Commercial Cargo program. And the US military has leverage over SpaceX through the National Security Space Launch Program.

Some of the wilder ideas involve forcing SpaceX to sell its Falcon 9 infrastructure to a third party—another space company, a space-interested billionaire, or someone else. Others have suggested that the US government could step in and nationalize SpaceX. That could be done if the US Congress passes a law stating that assured access to space is essential to national defense.

There are some major problems with this approach, though. Chief among them is that the Falcon 9 hardware and infrastructure work so well because of the engineers and technicians at SpaceX who have developed and continue to perfect the launch system. Many of these people would probably not want to work for a new employer (or the government) and would likely move to other positions or remain at SpaceX and move to the Starship program.

SpaceX founder Elon Musk would also have a massive war chest to oppose any such action, and because he is a large donor to Republicans, he would have considerable political capital to deploy.

And does it make sense to make war on SpaceX? The company’s success in launch and low-Earth orbit communications offers the United States its best weapon in the civil and national security contest with China, and lawmakers would likely be reluctant to kneecap that effort. For these reasons, space policy experts do not expect a serious conflict between the government and SpaceX over the future of the Falcon 9 rocket.

“Any government effort in this area to keep Falcon 9 flying would have to be mutually agreeable and beneficial to both parties,” said Scott Pace, director of the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University.

Pace and other policy experts said the US government could be taking actions now to address these problems, such as increasing the number of spaceports and being more accommodating of expansion at existing US launch facilities. Efforts could also be made to sign “technology safeguards agreements” with nations like Japan to allow US rockets to launch commercially from there and elsewhere in the world.

But the fundamental problems are not going away.

Over the last decade, many people in the US launch industry have issued forecasts that have been far too optimistic, and so far, only SpaceX has been able to rapidly increase its cadence. Demand has outstripped supply, and that will probably continue for some time.

“The way I think this pans out is we have a slow and eventual introduction of new vehicles and a slow and hopefully steady ramp up of rockets from incumbents,” Henry said. “And come the 2030s, we get some semblance of balance. But I don’t see it happening quickly, unfortunately.”

Read the whole story
sarcozona
10 minutes ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

DOGE Broke America’s Weather Machine. Now Fishermen, Insurers And Farmers Are Paying For It

1 Share

When Brian Ritchie takes his 53-foot charter fishing boat into the cold, choppy waters of the Cook Inlet near Homer, Alaska, carrying a dozen or more anglers hoping to catch Pacific halibut, he’s paying extra attention to weather conditions. That’s because an automated National Weather Service station that provided detailed local wind reports is offline and won’t be operational until at least November.

“It's a long season and we've gone half a year without knowing what the wind is doing in a part of the inlet that we fish a lot,” said Ritchie. “That's pretty important, especially for charter fishing. Because the people that I take out like watching ‘The Deadliest Catch,’ but they don't like living it.”

Ritchie’s weather station issue, which hasn’t resulted in any disasters so far, isn’t an isolated headache. Nationwide, launches of weather balloons have dropped, decreasing the amount of data on temperature, air pressure, humidity, wind speed and direction that feeds into weather prediction models, fire and marine weather forecasts and aids the aviation industry. Off U.S. coasts, fewer buoys are measuring wave conditions than in 2024. As wildfires rage across western states, there’s a tight supply of specialized meteorologists to provide detailed weather data that helps communities and firefighters make lifesaving, tactical decisions, people familiar with the matter told Forbes. A 20-year-old program that measures arctic ice just got cut, and plans for next-generation weather satellites to replace two critical ones that may begin to fail in the early 2030s have been halted.

This is what happens when the government dismantles the country’s vast environmental intelligence system. Built over decades, NOAA’s sprawling network of satellites, balloons, buoys, radar stations and scientists underpin much of the U.S. economy. Fishermen use it to decide whether waters are safe to sail. Farmers use it to determine when to plant and harvest. Airlines use it to route flights. Insurers and reinsurers use it to assess risk of losses from major events like hurricanes, fires and large-scale accidents. Utilities, builders and emergency officials use it to manage power grids, protect infrastructure and keep people alive.

“Sometimes its impacts are a little bit more diffuse unless you're directly employed by those sectors,” said Costa Samaras, director of Carnegie Mellon University’s Scott Institute for Energy Innovation, who advised the Biden administration on upgrading infrastructure for a warming climate. “There are also simple things like, ‘Will my street flood? Is there a hurricane approaching? Am I safe from tornadoes? These are all very tangible impacts people around the country tend to understand.”

Up to 6% of U.S. GDP is impacted by weather conditions, worth as much as $1.34 trillion annually

NOAA’s systems rarely announced their value. They just worked—until they didn’t. Now failures are arriving quietly: one dead weather station, one missing balloon, one stale map, one climate website at a time.

In dozens of interviews with current and former NOAA employees and representatives of industries that depend on its data, Forbes found that as America’s environmental intelligence goes dark piece by piece, it raises risks to lives and property while pushing new costs onto businesses and consumers. The systems and cuts made to them may seem obscure; the bill won’t be.

The root cause is Elon Musk’s DOGE program, which in early 2025 slashed jobs, budgets and programs in a Red Wedding massacre across all federal agencies. At the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which houses the National Weather Service and is responsible for providing crucial intel about weather and climate patterns, it began with a 10% budget cut and the elimination of about 17% of staff, totalling about 2,500 people. Worse, among those who left were several hundred veteran NOAA and NWS researchers who took early retirement deals.

“DOGE ripped apart the agency," said Craig McLean, a career NOAA researcher and former chief scientist who retired from it in 2022 after more than 40 years. “Across NOAA in totality, 27,000 years of experience left by April of last year.”

Congress prevented deeper cuts, but the Trump administration is seeking a further 27% reduction in fiscal 2027, aiming to slash the budget to about $4.4 billion from $6.17 billion beginning this year, a move critics say would do even more wide-ranging harm.

UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

“Even more damaging is the cutoff, not of future services, but of information products that are going stale across the board,” said Stephen Volz, a physicist who retired as an assistant administrator at NOAA in June. “That's where you see this thousand cuts of information ignorance.”

The National Weather Service is adding back staff, hiring 321 meteorologists, hydrologists, electronics technicians and physical scientists since late last year, said spokesman Christopher Vaccaro. He didn’t provide details on overall staffing at NOAA. Additionally, all 122 of NWS’s local weather forecast offices have enough staff to provide 24/7 forecasting operations, Vaccaro said.

Rachel Hager, with NOAA Fisheries, said it doesn’t discuss “personnel or internal management matters” and that it’s optimizing available resources.

“Perhaps no other federal entity facilitates greater economic and commercial activity than NOAA and its data sources”

Homer, Alaska’s dysfunctional weather station is just one example of how data collected by NOAA underpins not just weather apps, but shipping routes, insurance models and crop decisions. It informs construction choices made by architects, roadbuilders and city engineers, and triggers disaster warnings. Up to 6% of U.S. GDP is impacted by weather conditions, worth as much as $1.34 trillion annually. The National Weather Service estimated in 2024 that it produced $73 of value for taxpayers for every dollar invested into it.

“Perhaps no other federal entity facilitates greater economic and commercial activity than NOAA and its data sources,” Frank Nutter, former president of the Reinsurance Association of America (RAA), the financial industry that backstops insurance companies, told Congress in 2025 when lobbying to restore funding for NOAA that DOGE sought to cut.

That’s why NOAA is part of the Department of Commerce. “Weather impacts basically two-thirds of our economy in one way, shape or form,” said John Morales, a former NWS meteorologist and founder of consultancy ClimaData Corp. “And there are more things in harm's way nowadays. That's certainly a contributing factor to billion-dollar disasters increasing.”

Things like fewer weather balloons, ocean buoys and the fate of future weather satellites have some industries on edge. “Natural hazard observations and data access are core federal responsibilities and a critical national capability that serves every American,” said Karalee Morell, executive vice president and general counsel for RAA. Morell is particularly concerned about staffing shortages and how that’s impacting NOAA’s ability to gather the data that feeds into weather prediction models and forecasts essential to industries including construction, real estate, aviation and insurance that contribute hundreds of billions of dollars annually to the U.S. GDP.

Already, forecasters have been caught by surprise. In central Kansas, no one predicted two tornadoes that hit the region this past spring, apparently due to staffing shortages. Gaps in weather balloon coverage, also tied to fewer NOAA staff, led to less accurate predictions of Typhoon Halong’s intensity and storm path in western Alaska last October. Modeling by Alan Gerard, a former NWS meteorologist, shows a decline in the accuracy of the NWS’s global weather model between 2024 and 2025.

TNS

In the wake of Hurricane DOGE, complaints from industry groups and states led to bipartisan efforts to claw back funds for NOAA. For example, after deadly floods in Texas last summer, NWS was authorized to add 450 employees, but it appears to have only hired around 275 employees through the end of June. Most of those are less experienced than staff who took buyouts last year, said Margaret Cooney, an energy and climate policy specialist with the left-leaning Center for American Progress.

“They’ve gone into this extreme weather season a good 300 employees short and with reduced institutional knowledge of where they were pre-DOGE,” she said. “And with fewer resources and staff, current employees are stretched thin and without the tools needed to be consistently successful at their jobs.”

Today, NOAA researchers often aren't approved to travel to visit long-term measurement sites–like that weather station in Homer, Alaska–to do calibration and maintenance, according to a NOAA staffer who requested anonymity.

Over the past 18 months, NOAA data sites, including Climate.gov, Billion Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters, Radar Next, and regional marine and climate datasets, have been deactivated (though some of the research is being maintained by outside volunteers on non-government websites).

“The last year has been a heck of a rollercoaster,” said Chad Berginnis, executive director of the Association of State Floodplain Managers. His organization relies on NOAA data to guide the design of infrastructure like culverts, sewers and drainage channels to withstand intense rainfall and flooding. After the staff cuts, status reports on a critical update to that database, known as Atlas-15, stopped for months, though it’s back on track.

Similarly, weather satellites that take years to plan are functional, but future upgrades aren’t happening right now, said Volz, the former NOAA assistant administrator. “The satellite programs take a long time to build. They’re generational spacecraft systems–block upgrades you do every 10 to 20 years. And we’re about halfway, maybe two-thirds of the way through the block implementation for low-earth orbit” satellites, he said. But planning for replacements stopped last spring, after the DOGE team arrived, and “my biggest concern is that they are not going to be ready … when it needs to be in 2032,” Volz said.

Not everyone is experiencing disruptions. Carolyn Olson, who raises organic corn, soybeans, wheat and alfalfa in Cottonwood, Minnesota, and is vice president of the Minnesota Farmers Bureau, said the 10-day NWS forecasts she relies on to determine when to plant haven’t been affected by budget or staff cuts. And the NWS station in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, that produces them even “had a huge radar upgrade this summer,” she said.

“I may be more fortunate than some in other areas,” said Olson, a self-described weather nerd who was trained as a storm spotter by NWS and provides daily precipitation data from her farm to NOAA’s CoCoRaHS network.

More Cuts

Despite NOAA’s value to the economy, the Trump Administration wants to extend DOGE’s budget and staff cuts. Before his current role as director of the Office of Management and Budget, Russell Vought was the architect of Project 2025, a controversial collection of proposals for Trump’s second term that he denied knowledge of on the campaign trail but has largely adhered to as president.

NOAA “should be dismantled and many of its functions eliminated, sent to other agencies, privatized, or placed under the control of states and territories,” it declared. That didn’t happen under Musk, but Vought is still pushing for it in the 2027 budget request he submitted to Congress in April.

The proposal, which seeks to cut NOAA’s budget by $1.6 billion while boosting defense spending by $500 billion to $1.5 trillion in fiscal 2027, would terminate what Vought calls “Green New Scam programs at NOAA,” such as educational grants that “consistently funded efforts to radicalize students against markets, promote DEI, and spread baseless environmental alarm.”

“We’ve had to spend extra time working around the word ‘climate’” to sidestep the administration’s anti-climate science bent

NOAA researcher

The administration’s repudiation of climate science has meant that NOAA’s remaining staff must navigate linguistic hurdles. “We’ve had to spend extra time working around the word ‘climate,’” according to anonymous comments from staffers shared with Forbes. In seeking research funding, for example, that means replacing the word “climate” with “changing ecosystems” or “seasonal changes,” according to people familiar with the matter.

“We are trying to do the same climate-type work (albeit with fewer people) but have to tiptoe around so we can stay under the radar,” one person said.

That anti-climate militancy has hit projects that have nothing to do with climate science. Bill Dewey, a spokesman for aquaculture company Taylor Seafood who also runs a shellfish farm of his own off the coast of Washington, says his farm was part of a NOAA grant to harvest algae and transfer it to terrestrial fields to enhance the soil.

The Washington Post via Getty Images

“But because the title of the project was ‘Blue Carbon to Green Fields,’ it got canceled by the administration,” he said. The $5 million NOAA grant, for a study to be done by the University of Washington, was to determine if the algae is beneficial for farmed crops. It’s been partially restored, but without funding for scientific research.

“They're going to give me a little bit of money to harvest my seaweed and give it to some farmers,” Dewey said. “Hopefully, we can do some level of research to understand whether there's actually a benefit to it or not.”

NOAA’s challenges are also impacting Taylor Seafood, which sells $80 million a year of oysters, clams, mussels and geoducks raised off the coast of Washington state. Dewey said NOAA research on ocean acidification, which harms its crop, probably saved the 136-year-old company back in 2009. But now a new habitat restoration research plan Taylor submitted to NOAA isn’t moving as fast as hoped, apparently because of fewer scientific resources at the agency.

“We've been frustrated with the pace,” he said.

Private Data

Vought’s proposed gutting of NOAA is predicated in part on his desire that the agency’s functions should be privatized. Floodplain managers like Berginnis or civil engineers and urban planners fear that would raise costs and lead to unreliable data.

Cities and states would have to begin paying private data companies for information previously funded by federal taxes, said Marsha Anderson Bomar, president of the American Society of Civil Engineers and a long-time engineer for the city of Atlanta and its transit agency. Both she and Berginnis also worry private companies won’t be as open about their methodology as NOAA, making the data less trustworthy.

“What is your confidence that they have the experts who are going to make sure that we have the right data in the right form that is accurate, verified and validated? All those things that engineers worry about,” she told Forbes. “Because if I use a data source that I don't know for sure has been validated, I could be way off. It only takes a small error in an early calculation to have something go very wrong.”

Musk and Vought may not value what NOAA does, but maintaining the breadth of its work is a priority across multiple industries.

“Collecting basic data isn’t sexy, so it doesn't capture the public's mind or eye, but I guarantee you it’s foundational to not only our hazard reduction efforts, but I think to our very success as a country,” said floodplain manager Berginnis.

“Having good, solid science and data allows us to build programs and policies and all those things on top of it. You take away that foundation and I’m very, very concerned about what direction that takes us.”

More from Forbes

ForbesMusk Escalates Unproven USAID Claims In Fiery Posts—As Studies Link DOGE Cuts To Child DeathsForbesWhy Elon Musk’s China Ties Are DOGE’s Biggest Conflict Of InterestForbesElon Musk Is A Billionaire Federal Welfare Vampire
Read the whole story
sarcozona
1 hour ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

Visit to Boston made Boca Raton resident feel miserable about living in Boca Raton

1 Share
Local News Ian Pinto visited Boston for the first time from July 31 to Aug. 3. Ian Pinto

A Boca Raton resident was left questioning why he lives in Boca Raton after a trip to Boston left him blown away with the city. 

“My trip to Boston made me realize my hometown sucks,” 20-year-old Ian Pinto titled a Reddit post he made after a four-day trip to Boston on July 31. 

“I know vacationing is different than living at a place, but it just felt so much better,” he said. 

Pinto traveled to Boston with his girlfriend Domenica Corral to visit her brother who lives in the city. The couple stayed near Boston Harbor and tried to experience everything the city has to offer, including lobster rolls at James Hook & Co, shopping on Newbury Street, and traveling via the MBTA’s Orange Line. 

Pinto, who has lived in Boca Raton his entire life, said the trip widened his perspective on the world. 

“It really made me think, ‘wow, there is more to life than where you’re born,’” he said. 

Pinto’s post highlighted the differences between Boca Raton and Boston, including its walkability and public transportation. Pinto said using the train was easy and allowed him to explore the entire city. 

Unlike in Boston, Pinto said he has to drive everywhere in Boca Raton because of how the city is spread out.

Pinto also said Boston was “surprisingly cheaper” compared to Boca Raton’s extremely high prices and the food “tasted a billion times better.”  

“I spend $10 for a tiny latte in Boca, but in Boston, I didn’t spend more than $6,” he said. “$4-5 was the norm! The restaurants were so reasonable as well.” 

Pinto, who runs a pizza-making Instagram account, said the pizza in particular was “way better” than any pizza found in South Florida. 

Some Reddit users in the comment section argued against describing the city as “cheap.”

“I’m shocked you think Boston is cheap,” one user wrote.

“Depends where you went and what you ordered but Boston is absolutely not cheap,” another user commented. 

Pinto said another thing he enjoyed about Boston was the people. Pinto said people were extremely kind, welcoming, and “woke.” 

“Almost every cafe and restaurant had pride stickers, and I even saw a catholic church having a pro trans sign,” Pinto said. “In boca, you would lose 70% of your customers if you even affiliated yourself with politics, but these shops were literally thriving and packed. It’s really nice to be surrounded by likeminded people.” 

Many commenters said the post was a nice reminder to appreciate the city they live in. 

“I love Boston,” a user commented. “Thanks for your review to remind us how good we have it.” 

Pinto said he hopes to one day move to Boston with Corral. He said the trip left him inspired to be open-minded and travel more, prompting him to open a travel credit card to plan more trips. 

“It genuinely opened my eyes because I haven’t really escaped my bubble in my hometown and so when I left and I had access to walkable cities, a walk away from everything, it really just opened my eyes,” he said. “Seeing the unity that you guys have in Boston is just incredible.”

Get everything you need to know to start your day, delivered right to your inbox every morning.

Read the whole story
sarcozona
3 hours ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

BC Is Quietly Planning to Split Forest Lands into Three Use Zones | The Tyee

1 Share

British Columbia’s government is contemplating carving the province into three zones to “provide greater clarity” to the timber industry, and discussions have so far left out First Nations.

The zoning plan is outlined in an email sent in early July to public servants in the Ministry of Forests and the Ministry of Water, Land and Resource Stewardship, a copy of which was provided to The Tyee by a source who requested anonymity.

“The concept will consider three zones: commercial forestry, multiple-use and conservation and protection,” the leaked email reads, adding the zones will “provide greater clarity to achieve both investment stability and community economic benefits, and biodiversity and ecosystem stewardship goals for the land base.”

The email provides no detail on how much forest might ultimately be placed in each of the zones, leaving open questions about just what impact the proposed plan would have on everything from at-risk species to rural and First Nations communities, and a logging industry that has been on a sharp downward spiral for years.

It also makes no mention of whether any parties with a stake in a reshuffled forestry deck received advance notice of the government’s plans. In response to questions, the Ministry of Forests said only that consultations “will begin shortly.”

The Tyee has learned that the email circulated widely to staff in both ministries and was sent by three senior political appointees — Makenzie Leine and Ian Meier, deputy and associate deputy ministers of the Ministry of Forests, and Lori Halls, deputy minister of the Ministry of Water, Land and Resource Stewardship.

Its contents drew a sharp rebuke from Grand Chief Stewart Phillip of the Union of BC Indian Chiefs, who told The Tyee that the organization’s 140-plus First Nations members received no notice of the government’s intentions.

“I find it highly offensive that the provincial government would consider such a momentous shift... without even giving the First Nations, the title holders in this province, a heads-up to say we’re well into the planning of this,” Phillip told The Tyee.

“It’s a complete breach of DRIPA [the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act] and the responsibilities that B.C. has under DRIPA to closely consult with First Nations.”

The Council of Forest Industries meanwhile welcomed the initiative, linking it to a Ministry of Forests objective to increase logging rates in the province’s forests to 45 million cubic metres per year — a target Premier David Eby set out in his mandate letter to Minister of Forests Ravi Parmar.

“We support the government’s commitment to achieving a minimum annual harvest of 45 million cubic metres and are prepared to work with government, First Nations and other partners and stakeholders to explore practical policy approaches that help deliver that target,” Michael Armstrong, the Council of Forest Industries’ senior vice-president and chief forester, told The Tyee.

Aim is ‘greater clarity,’ says ministry

The Tyee reached out to both ministries for comment, hearing back only from the Ministry of Forests.

“B.C.’s forest sector is under significant pressure,” the ministry said in a prepared response to questions, noting those challenges include “volatile markets, low pulp prices, increasing transportation costs, limited fibre supply due to challenges including the end of the beetle kill and wildfires, climate-driven wildfires, and punishing duties and tariffs imposed by the United States.”

The ministry added that a zoning effort would result in more stability for an embattled industry.

“By providing greater clarity on where forestry activities will occur and where conservation will occur, we can support jobs, communities, and sustainable forest management, and also enhance biodiversity and ecosystem health outcomes,” the ministry said.

Zoning approach was floated before

The idea of zoning B.C.’s lands is not new. The Tyee has previously reported that calls to delineate areas of the province where logging and resource developments would be allowed, and areas where they would not, go back decades. But successive governments didn’t act — until now.

Almost 30 years ago, Clark Binkley, a former dean at the University of British Columbia’s faculty of forestry, was a notable zoning proponent.

As environmental groups battled organized labour and the forest industry over proposed protected areas during the so-called “war in the woods” in the 1990s, Binkley argued that there was ample opportunity to vastly expand parkland while also increasing timber production.

Binkley’s proposed solution was effectively a two-zone system where logging companies were permitted to intensively manage a portion of B.C.’s lands to grow trees and there was a corresponding increase in the number of protected forests.

“Such a policy could lead to substantially higher, sustainable timber harvests as well as a system of parks that covers more than half the province,” Binkley wrote in 1997.

A grey-haired Indigenous man, Stewart Phillip, looks to the side. Grand Chief Stewart Phillip of the Union of BC Indian Chiefs: ‘There’s a mindset within the provincial NDP government of fast-tracking everything.’ Photo by David P. Ball.

More recently, the provincial government received a report it commissioned from two professional foresters on the future of old-growth forests in B.C. Authored by Al Gorley and Garry Merkel and released in 2020, the report called for a three-zone system for the province.

Gorley and Merkel’s zones included protected forests and ecosystems that would be “largely left alone,” converted forests where logging had continued and would likely continue to occur, and what they called “consistent” forests that would be managed to keep their ecosystems and biological diversity in a healthy state. The Tyee reached out to both Merkel and Gorley to ask their thoughts on the government’s proposed zones but did not hear back.

Test phase to be unveiled in the fall

The zoning email notes that the initiative will be led by two assistant deputy ministers — Jessica Coster from the Ministry of Forests and David Muter from the Ministry of Water, Land and Resource Stewardship.

It goes on to say that the “project team is in the exploration and assessment phase and will bring together teams from both ministries to examine options and identify how the model could be applied in practice to selected candidate areas.”

The email makes no mention of potential candidate sites or regions but says an initial report to the provincial cabinet on how such a zoning system might work could come as early as this fall.

“We will have more to say in the fall about the next steps in this process, specifically around a test phase,” the ministry said in response to The Tyee’s questions, adding:

“The test phase will include continued partnership and engagement with First Nations along with focused engagement with industry, local governments, environmental non-government organizations (ENGOs), and other interested parties, as well as ongoing public updates.”

The ministry went on to say that “engagement” with various parties will begin shortly, and that those parties include industry, First Nations and local governments. It also said it would have more to say publicly on its plans in the next couple of weeks.

Worries about how lines are drawn

Mike Morris, a former provincial cabinet minister and thrice-elected MLA for Prince George-Mackenzie, expressed alarm at the initiative’s timing, which he noted comes on the heels of decades of heightened and unsustainable logging that has caused wildlife populations to tumble.

He went on to say that, to be credible, any rezoning effort must consider watershed boundaries or valleys, given the demonstrated damage that has been done as a result of extensive clearcut logging and road-building in many watersheds.

“There’s 30 years of science that says that clearcutting causes increased frequency, magnitude and duration of floods and droughts, which leads to increased wildfires and landslides and all that other kind of stuff,” Morris saic. “If they don’t have science at the forefront [of this zoning effort], they will fail miserably.”

A South Asian middle-aged man, Ravi Parmar, speaks in front of the B.C. legislature. BC Minister of Forests Ravi Parmar. Consultations on the forest lands zoning plan will ‘begin shortly,’ says his ministry. Photo via BC government Flickr.

Peachland resident Taryn Skalbania agrees with Morris, saying that any new zoning exercise must recognize the importance of watersheds. She is the founder of the Peachland Watershed Protection Alliance, an organization that came into being after landslides in the heavily logged local watershed so contaminated the community’s drinking water with sediment that local residents were forced to boil their water for months on end.

Skalbania said that in the past year she and other Okanagan residents have met directly or been on conference calls with 11 MLAs in the Okanagan, Kootenay and central Interior regions as well as with Ravi Parmar and Randene Neill, minister of water, land and resource stewardship.

In every meeting, Skalbania said, the MLAs and cabinet ministers were told that more must be done to safeguard watersheds and that areas of unlogged forests in watersheds, in particular, should be considered as priorities for protection.

Skalbania said she favours a rezoned land base in the province that begins with conserving remaining unlogged natural forests and protecting community watersheds. She also advocates for a second “restoration zone” where lands damaged by previous industrial activities are treated with an eye to bringing back wildlife, stabilizing soils and safeguarding water supplies. And she favours a third zone where logging is permitted, but only on a portion of the land where logging has already taken place.

image atom
As Forests Burn Again, BC Is Changing Tactics ‘On the Fly’
read more

Old-growth forests should be absolute “no-go zones,” Skalbania said, adding that restored lands should be off limits as well. “We’re not restoring them just to cut them down again, but restoring them on the landscape to provide shade, water storage and biodiversity,” she said.

‘We’re in a biodiversity crisis,’ says conservationist

Anthony Britneff, who worked in several senior positions for the provincial Ministry of Forests over four decades, told The Tyee that it is hard to envision a rezoning exercise led by his former employer that places any restrictions on where logging companies may go.

Hitting the logging target of 45 million cubic metres would, he predicted, see all unlogged valley bottoms outside of existing parks placed into the proposed commercial forestry zone.

Lands designated multiple-use would almost certainly remain open to logging as well, Britneff predicted, noting that multiple-use has been a cornerstone of provincial forest policy for decades.

Finally, he said it is not out of the question that lands zoned for conservation and protection might be subject to periodic logging as well on the grounds that it would prevent wildfires or insects from allegedly damaging or destroying such forests.

Britneff warned that the cumulative effect of all that would likely be the logging of all remnant old-growth forests, leading to “the complete ruination of the province’s rivers and biodiversity.” Any rezoning of provincial lands, Britneff added, should occur only after a “public inquiry and widespread consultation.”

A dark-haired woman of early middle age wears a reflective vest and stands in a forest setting. Michelle Connolly of Conservation North: ‘The only way’ zoning forests can ‘avert calamity’ is by protecting ‘all primary forest.’ Photo supplied.

In response to questions, the ministry said that its proposed commercial forestry zone would “provide the greatest certainty for forestry operations.”

image atom
Logging Companies Are Pushing into High-Elevation Forests
read more

It added that logging and other industrial activities would also be permitted in the second proposed multiple-use zone, although in that zone more of a priority would be placed on “biodiversity, restoration, and ecosystem health.”

In the third proposed conservation and protection zone, the ministry said “commercial forestry would not be permitted.” But it did not rule out that such zones might require “active stewardship” to “improve biodiversity, ecosystem health, habitat, and ecological function over time.”

It did not define what such active stewardship might involve.

Michelle Connolly, director of Prince George-based Conservation North, says “the only zonation system that works for biodiversity and ecosystem health” is one that protects so-far unlogged primary or natural forests from chainsaws.

She said her organization rejects any suggestion that some logging may be necessary in such old-growth forests to restore their health and make them more “resilient” in the face of disturbances such as wildfires and insect attacks.

“We’re in a biodiversity crisis and the only way to avert calamity is to build a three-zone system that protects all primary forest (Zone 1), allocates degraded land to restoration in a permanent way (Zone 2), and dedicates some previously logged areas to responsible forestry,” Connolly said in an email.

image atom
The Forest Quietly Removed from BC’s Old-Growth Deferral List
read more

In addition to the Forests Ministry pushing to find more timber for the logging industry, Chief Phillip noted that the provincial government also recently pushed through passage of bills 14 and 15 — the Renewable Energy Projects (Streamlined Permitting) Act and the Infrastructure Projects Act. Both are intended to expedite major projects in the province, including new pipelines, liquified natural gas plants and mines, Phillip said.

“There’s a mindset within the provincial NDP government of fast-tracking everything,” Phillip said, adding that he worries the zoning exercise could be fast-tracked as well.

Rather than that, Phillip said, the government should approach any rezoning exercise as it did when it pursued creating new parks and land-use plans in the 1990s.

Phillip noted that when land and resource management plans, or LRMPs, were pursued in the 1990s, “there was intensive consultation with ranchers, the timber community, municipalities, regional districts and First Nations.”

“That process was very robust from the outset,” Phillip said.  [Tyee]

Read the whole story
sarcozona
3 hours ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

Does mayor Wu actually feel sorry about her dead co-worker - Cambridge | Somerville Independent

1 Share
Michelle Wu speaks at a July 16 vigil at Boston City Hall for bike advocate Louisa Gag. (Photo: John Wilcox/Mayor’s Office via Flickr)

The mayor of Boston is on the news again. In each interview, her voice is warbling and unsure, yet each word conveys her utter grief over her friend’s death. For weeks, she has told anyone who will listen that she “will never get over it,” and that the tragic scene, with its screeching tires and crunching bone and metal, was a call to action.

I am sure that when the mayor lies awake at night, she sees a sunny day in Mission Hill. She sees her friend riding down the street. The mayor wonders, did she look over her shoulder? Was she afraid? When her spirit left her body, did it split the sky? I think in those dark hours, she must ask herself what ocean will wash this blood clean from her hand and finds no answer. I think this is true.

Advertisement

I also think that the mayor is full of shit.

Mayor Michelle Wu is responsible for the systematic delay and cancellation of street safety projects. These projects, ranging from simple bike lanes and street reconstruction to extensive transit overhauls, were designed and funded, and now have been canceled. Wu’s staff have told reporters that the mayor must approve every project personally before it can continue, to the point where they are no longer allowed to even communicate directly with the MBTA. The political reasons for this are not the point. What matters is that she chose to change her policies to impeding from supporting.

What has left many of us confused is the fact that this was seemingly for no reason. Pilloried in the national press for being woke and by the local press for her support of bike lanes, Wu emerged victorious in a landslide reelection against Josh Kraft, who explicitly ran against street safety. Wu had a mandate to implement her agenda, the agenda that her staff (including people such as Louisa Gag, the cyclist and city planner who was killed) worked tirelessly to plan, fund and build.

Instead, Wu retreated and hoped nobody would notice. One theory for this is that she is hoping to run for higher office and wants to seem more moderate. To me, that is shortsighted. In a time when someone such as New York’s Zohran Mamdani is happy to take the reins of a big city and shape it in his vision, why can’t Wu be content with what she has? She could rule here for 20 years, put her name on the side of every chain-link construction fence as she implements the green, safe and affordable city that she promised years ago, and people would thank her for it. There are people who would kill to be Boston’s mayor. It seems that Wu would kill to be Elizabeth Warren’s successor.

I think it is bogus that, over a month later, her staff is setting her up with softball interviews during which she can deflect blame. She frames the entire discussion as a quibble over the cost and utility of flex posts (and as usual, the journalist involved accepts this without pushback). In fact, the conflict is about whether her actions contributed to the death of someone she was close to! And why she turned her back on those who believed in her.

In her response, Wu promised more process, more listening and more planning. This is the brainworm that has paralyzed Democrats nationally – the abject fear of doing something even slightly unpopular, the fear of power being wielded to implement one’s agenda and not for the insulation of those who wield it. This paralysis is so familiar that we plebeians have learned to abuse it. Want to stop something? Claim you weren’t listened to. Say there needed to be a better process.

If the mayor truly felt guilty, she would not promise to reorganize various subcommittees and evaluate priorities and consult stakeholders. She would not lie and say that the police will begin enforcing traffic laws. And if she really wanted this to end, she would restart the projects she has thwarted.

Life is the slow process of accepting death. People die, and we grieve and move on. It is something else when there’s a throughline between one’s actions and someone else’s death. It must be hard to be Michelle Wu. The weight of it must crush her. I know it could crush me.

Nicholas Marchuk is a local author and engineer. His work is available at major retailers and on his website, nicholasmarchuk.com. Comments and questions can be directed to his contact form and may be responded to in this publication.

About The Author

Read the whole story
sarcozona
16 hours ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

Wildfire smoke now bigger prenatal threat than human sources of air pollution - Ars Technica

1 Share
Read the whole story
sarcozona
19 hours ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories