Virgin Orbit Offers More Details on Rocket Failure

More than 110 miles above earth, the rocket’s second-stage engine prematurely shut down before entering orbit, causing the loss of nine satellites.

Virgin Orbit, the company that tried to launch satellites into space from Britain for the first time earlier this week, said on Thursday that a problem with the rocket’s second-stage engine about 110 miles above the earth caused the failure of the mission.

Virgin Orbit said in a statement that the problem, which it called an anomaly, “prematurely ended the first burn of the upper stage,” or second stage, of the rocket carrying the satellites. In other words the second-stage engine, which was supposed to lift the satellites high enough to begin orbit, shut down for some reason.

The company said that the rocket and its nine satellites fell to earth within what it called “the approved safety corridor.”

The rocket was launched from Virgin Orbit’s modified Boeing 747 that had taken off from Newquay airport in southwest England late Monday night. The plane and its crew returned safely, but Virgin Orbit clearly has work to do to maintain its business and its reputation.

The company, founded by Richard Branson and based in California, has only a handful of launches in the United States under its belt, but it aspires to establish itself as a global launch provider. The failure of its first international launch is obviously a blow to this effort as well as to Britain’s emerging space program.

Some of the satellites on board belonged to Britain, the United States and other governments, which are unlikely to feel much financial pain from the loss. But for one of the satellite makers, Horizon Technologies, a start-up based in Reading, England, the loss of its device could threaten the company’s existence.

John Beckner, the company’s chief executive, said Horizon had put $4 million into developing the marine intelligence satellite, a tiny device known as a cubesat, for a British government-funded organization, and that “for a company of our size, this loss, if not rectified, could be mortal.”

Mr. Beckner said he was “working with Virgin and the U.K. government in getting compensation for the loss.”

Mr. Beckner also said the company also hoped to launch further versions of the satellite.

When Virgin Orbit will be ready to launch again is unclear. The company said it anticipated returning to Newquay airport for additional launches, but that its next flight would be from its main base, in the Mojave Desert.

It said Jim Sponnick, a space industry veteran, was helping to lead an investigation into the causes of the failure.

#Space | https://sciencespies.com/space/virgin-orbit-offers-more-details-on-rocket-failure/

EPA Waste Ban Blocks Pebble Mine Project in Alaska

The move to ban disposal of mining wastes near the site of the proposed Pebble mine, made under the Clean Water Act, protects a valuable salmon fishery.

The Biden administration on Tuesday moved to protect one of the world’s most valuable wild salmon fisheries, at Bristol Bay in Alaska, by effectively blocking the development of a gold and copper mine there.

The Environmental Protection Agency issued a final determination under the Clean Water Act that bans the disposal of mine waste in part of the bay’s watershed, about 200 miles southwest of Anchorage. Streams in the watershed are crucial breeding grounds for salmon, but the area also contains deposits of precious-metal ores thought to be worth several hundred billion dollars.

A two-decades old proposal to mine those ores, called the Pebble project, has been supported by some Alaskan lawmakers and Native groups for the economic benefits it would bring, but opposed by others, including tribes around the bay and environmentalists who say it would do irreparable harm to the salmon population.

Alannah Hurley, executive director of United Tribes of Bristol Bay, which has long opposed the mine, said the decision “was a real moment of justice for us.”

She said the tribes had long been told that “we just need to fall in line” and that the mine was inevitable. “Thank goodness our tribal leaders did not accept that,” Ms. Hurley said. “We’ll be celebrating this decision for decades to come.”

Michael Regan, the administrator of the E.P.A., said the decision came after an extensive review of scientific and technical research. “We’re committed to making science-based decisions within our regulatory authority that will provide durable protections for people and the planet,” Mr. Regan said. “And that’s exactly what we’re doing today.”

The company behind the mine project, Pebble Limited Partnership, called the E.P.A. action unlawful and unprecedented.

The Biden Administration’s Environmental Agenda

• Colorado River: The seven states that rely on water from the shrinking river are unlikely to agree to voluntarily make deep reductions in their water use, which would force the Biden administration to impose cuts.
• Mining Ban: A 20-year moratorium on new mining activity for more than 225,000 acres of federal land in Minnesota could deal a fatal blow to a proposed Twin Metals copper-nickel mine.
• Logging in Alaska: The Biden administration banned logging and road-building on about nine million acres of the Tongass National Forest, North America’s largest temperate rainforest.
• A Struggling E.P.A.: Despite an injection of funding, the Environmental Protection Agency is still reeling from an exodus of scientists and policy experts during the Trump administration.

“The Biden E.P.A. continues to ignore fair and due process in favor of politics,” John Shively, the company’s chief executive, said in a statement. “This pre-emptive action against Pebble is not supported legally, technically, or environmentally.”

The determination makes good on a campaign promise by President Biden to protect the bay. The sockeye salmon fishery there is the largest in the world, employing about 15,000 people and last year harvesting 60 million fish worth an estimated $350 million. The fishery’s economic benefits also extend beyond Alaska, particularly to Washington State.

In addition, Bristol Bay salmon is the basis for a thriving sport-fishing industry in Alaska and is a traditional subsistence food for many Natives in the region.

Mr. Shively said the company would likely appeal the determination. And there is the possibility that a future presidential administration that favors development of a mine could seek to somehow overturn it.

Determinations like this one, based on the 1972 Clean Water Act, are rare, with only three issued in the past 30 years, Mr. Regan said. This one, he said. was based on “very solid science.”

“Obviously, a final determination may be challenged in a federal court and we can’t predict what future administrations may or may not do,” he said. “But what we can assure everyone of is that there is a very solid record here.”

Machinery at the proposed mine site in 2007. The project called for a mine from which tens of millions of tons of rock ore would be removed annually.Luis Sinco/Los Angeles Times, via Getty Images

In its determination, the agency said the Bristol Bay watershed, including streams that the salmon use for spawning, was a “significant resource of global conservation value.

The agency said that disposal of material from construction and operation of the mine would destroy 100 miles of streams and more than 2,100 acres of wetlands. It said an earlier Environmental Impact Statement, prepared during the Trump administration, which found that these losses would be inconsequential to fish populations, “did not represent an accurate and thorough assessment of likely impacts.”

The action is one of several recent moves by the Biden administration to protect environmentally sensitive lands from commercial interests.

Last week, the administration moved to establish a 20-year moratorium on mining near the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness in Minnesota, effectively blocking a long-disputed proposal for a copper and nickel mine. And the administration reinstated protections in the Tongass National Forest in southeastern Alaska, overturning a Trump administration decision that would have allowed logging there.

Since it was first proposed in the early 2000s, the Pebble mine project has had a roller-coaster existence, its prospects lurching from bright to bleak over the years.

In the late 2000s it gained support from Alaska’s governor at the time, Sarah Palin, a pro-development Republican. But the E.P.A. in the Obama administration moved to block the mine in 2014, citing the Clean Water Act and the risks to the salmon fishery.

The agency under President Trump then reversed the Obama-era ruling, giving the project new life. Late in the Trump administration, however, after opposition from some Republicans, including the president’s son Donald Trump Jr., an avid sport fisherman, the United States Army Corps of Engineers denied the project a critical permit.

The Pebble partnership has appealed the corps’ decision. Radhika Fox, the assistant E.P.A. administrator for water, said that if the company were to succeed in the appeal, the Corps still could not approve the project, given the E.P.A. determination, unless it were somehow changed and the new proposal “does not have the similar adverse effects of this proposal.”

Senator Maria Cantwell, Democrat of Washington, one of the first lawmakers to oppose the project, said she was “ecstatic” about the E.P.A. action. Washington State residents hold about a quarter of the commercial permits to fish for Bristol Bay sockeye, and much of the harvest passes through the state’s ports.

“This is such a big economic consequence to salmon and to the Northwest economy and lifestyle,” she said. “This isn’t just an Alaska issue.”

The Pebble proposal calls for an open-pit mine on a square mile of land, eventually dug to a depth of about 1,500 feet. Tens of millions of tons of rock ore would be removed annually and processed to extract gold and copper as well as molybdenum, which is used to strengthen steel in alloys.

The project would also include the construction of a power plant and pipeline for the gas to fuel it, as well as an access road and a port.

In 2020, Pebble executives were recorded saying they expected the project to become much bigger, and operate for much longer, than originally outlined. The executives, who were recorded by members of an environmental advocacy group posing as potential investors, said the mine could operate for 160 years or more beyond the proposed 20 years. And it could quickly double its output after the initial two decades, they said.

The comments eventually led to the resignation of the company’s chief executive at the time, Tom Collier.

The E.P.A. determination is the latest blow to the project. In December, the Conservation Fund, an environmental preservation organization, purchased conservation easements for 44,000 acres of land owned by a Native village corporation near Iliamna Lake, about 20 miles south of the proposed mine site and the area covered by the E.P.A. ruling.

The easements effectively block development and would make construction of an access road more difficult.

#Environment | https://sciencespies.com/environment/epa-waste-ban-blocks-pebble-mine-project-in-alaska/

Deer Could Be a Reservoir of Old Coronavirus Variants, Study Suggests

Even after Delta became the dominant variant in humans, Alpha and Gamma continued to circulate in white-tailed deer, according to new research.

The Alpha and Gamma variants of the coronavirus continued to circulate and evolve in white-tailed deer, even after they stopped spreading widely among people, a new study suggests.

Whether the variants are still circulating in deer remains unknown. “That’s the big question,” said Dr. Diego Diel, a virologist at Cornell University and an author of the study, which was published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on Tuesday.

But the findings, which are based on samples collected through December 2021, provide more evidence that deer could be a reservoir of the virus and a potential source of future variants, which could spill back into human populations.

“It is a very large wildlife population in North America that has constant and very intense contact with humans,” Dr. Diel said.

Previous studies of deer have suggested humans have repeatedly introduced the coronavirus into white-tailed deer populations in the United States and Canada and that deer can spread the virus to one another. Scientists are not sure how people are passing the virus to deer, but they have speculated that it might happen when people feed deer or deer encounter human trash or waste.

More on the Coronavirus Pandemic

• End of an Era: The Biden administration plans to let the coronavirus public health emergency expire in May, a sign that federal officials believe the pandemic has moved into a new, less dire phase.
• Long Covid: An analysis of workers’ compensation claims in New York found that 71 percent of claimants with long Covid needed continuing medical treatment or were unable to work for six months or more.
• Annual Boosters: The Food and Drug Administration proposed that most Americans be offered a single dose of a Covid vaccine each fall, much as they are given flu shots.

The scale of the risk that infected deer pose to humans remains unclear. Scientists have documented one case that most likely resulted from deer-to-human transmission in Ontario, and they note that hunters and others who have regular contact with the animals could potentially catch the virus from them.

For the new study, Dr. Diel and his colleagues analyzed about 5,500 tissue samples collected from deer killed by hunters in New York State from September through December in the years 2020 and 2021.

During the 2020 season, just 0.6 percent of the samples tested positive for the virus, a figure that rose to 21 percent during the 2021 season.

Genetic sequencing revealed that three different variants of concern — Alpha, Gamma and Delta — were all present in deer during the 2021 season.

At the time, Delta was still prevalent among New York’s human residents. But Alpha and Gamma had practically vanished, especially in the rural parts of the state where the infected deer were found.

The scientists also compared the genomic sequences of the viral samples they detected in deer to those that had been collected from humans. In the deer, all three variants had new mutations that set them apart from the human sequences. But the Alpha and Gamma samples from deer diverged more significantly from the human sequences than the Delta samples from deer did, the researchers found.

Together, the results suggested that Alpha and Gamma had likely been circulating among deer and accumulating new mutations for months after spilling over from the human population, experts said.

“It supports the argument that deer can sustain lineages or variants that are no longer circulating in humans,” said Dr. Suresh Kuchipudi, a veterinary microbiologist at Pennsylvania State University, who was not involved in the new research.

The finding not only raises concerns that deer could be a source of new coronavirus variants that could spread back to people; it also raises the possibility that the virus might evolve in ways that pose a greater risk to wild animals, he added. “It could also end up becoming an animal health problem,” Dr. Kuchipudi said.

The study highlights the need for ongoing surveillance of wild deer populations, Dr. Kuchipudi and Dr. Diel said. Dr. Diel and his colleagues are preparing to analyze deer samples from the 2022 hunting season to determine whether the virus remains widespread among deer and which variants may be circulating.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that deer hunters take a variety of basic precautions to reduce the risk of infection, including wearing masks while handling game and washing hands thoroughly afterward.

#News | https://sciencespies.com/news/deer-could-be-a-reservoir-of-old-coronavirus-variants-study-suggests/

At NASA, Thomas Zurbuchen Was Ready to Let Some Missions Fail

Thomas Zurbuchen concluded six years leading NASA’s science directorate, during which he presided over some of the agency’s biggest successes.

Dr. Z has left the building.

After six years, Thomas Zurbuchen concluded his tenure as the head of NASA’s science missions at the end of 2022.

During his time there, he earned his single-letter nickname while presiding over some of the agency’s biggest successes in the exploration of the solar system and the universe: the long-delayed launch of the James Webb Space Telescope; the landing on Mars of the Perseverance rover, which was accompanied by the Ingenuity helicopter; and the slamming of the DART spacecraft into a small asteroid, demonstrating a technique that could be used if a space rock were discovered on a collision course with Earth.

“Immensely proud of what we’ve achieved as a team,” Dr. Zurbuchen said in an interview. “Also sad to leave the team that is here, the job that I’ve really loved.”

Dr. Zurbuchen held the job of associate administrator for the science directorate for a longer continuous stretch than any of his predecessors.

It is a job that is akin to running a space agency within a space agency. NASA’s science directorate has a budget — $7.8 billion for the current fiscal year — that is larger than that of the entire European Space Agency. In addition to planetary science and astrophysics, the directorate also oversees earth science research.

For Dr. Zurbuchen, 54, it was time to leave.

He said it was important for the science directorate to be led by someone who was pushing new ideas, as NASA had already implemented many of his. While he still enjoyed the job, he said that in the seventh year of putting together and implementing budgets, he was learning less. “Those two things made me think about, ‘How do I find the right exit?’” he said.

Dr. Zurbuchen, center, during a tour of the Space Station Processing Facility at the Kennedy Space Center.Bill White/NASA

But he is gone before seeing whether one of his biggest bets — higher-risk, lower-cost collaborations with small private companies to send science instruments to the moon — will pay off.

The program is known as Commercial Lunar Payload Services, or CLPS. That continued a shift at NASA, similar to how it now relies on companies like SpaceX to provide transportation of astronauts and cargo to the space station.

When CLPS was announced in 2018, Dr. Zurbuchen said NASA was aiming to take “shots on goal,” a soccer or hockey metaphor that acknowledged that not every shot scores and that not every CLPS mission would successfully arrive at its destination intact.

NASA officials said then that the first CLPS mission could launch as soon as the following year, in 2019, and the aim was to fly two CLPS missions each year.

But today none of them have yet reached the launchpad. Instead of eight missions already, there are still zero shots on goal.

“CLPS has not proven itself,” Dr. Zurbuchen conceded, although two launches are on the schedule for 2023. One lander is from Intuitive Machines of Houston, to be launched on top of a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket; the other lander is from Astrobotic Technology of Pittsburgh, riding on the maiden flight of United Launch Alliance’s new Vulcan Centaur rocket.

If both companies succeed on their first tries, NASA officials will certainly celebrate. But except for successes by China, all of the robotic moon landing attempts in recent years have crashed. What if one of the CLPS missions fails? Or both?

Dr. Zurbuchen, somewhere in the scrum at lower left, visited SpaceX’s California facility containing the Falcon 9 rocket and the DART spacecraft as they were readied for launch in 2021.Bill Ingalls/NASA

The key, he said, is to take smart risks, and not to panic if not all of the risks pay off. “The fastest way of turning off all innovation is to punish the people who do listen to you and actually are trying new things,” Dr. Zurbuchen said. “Let’s not kill them.”

The next associate administrator would have to decide how to adjust course.

“After how many CLPS failures do we say, ‘Hey, it’s not working?’” Dr. Zurbuchen said. “It’s an experiment, right? There is no way to get to the moon otherwise for substantially less than a billion bucks. And that’s what we tried to break, that cost of entry.”

Dr. Zurbuchen was in some ways an unusual choice for the job. A native of Switzerland, he earned his Ph.D. at the University of Bern and completed considerable research on solar science. He had led the development of one of the instruments on NASA’s Messenger spacecraft that had orbited Mercury, but Dr. Zurbuchen had never worked at NASA.

In 2016, Dr. Zurbuchen, then a professor at the University of Michigan and founding director of the university’s Center for Entrepreneurship, got a phone call from John Grunsfeld, then the NASA associate administrator for science. Dr. Grunsfeld said he was planning to step down and told Dr. Zurbuchen that he should apply for the position.

In an interview, Dr. Grunsfeld said he had not been involved in selecting his successor, “but I wanted to make sure that there was a good pool of candidates.”

He thought candidates should “share some of the philosophy for new concepts and advancing science that I have,” Dr. Grunsfeld said.

Dr. Zurbuchen, right, with John Thornton, left, and Sharad Bhaskaran, second from left, of Astrobotic, one of two Commercial Lunar Payload Service missions that will launch for the moon next year.Aubrey Gemignani/NASA

NASA’s science directorate runs big projects like the James Webb Space Telescope with budgets that run into the billions of dollars. But there were also scientific opportunities for using tiny CubeSats. “I knew that he was interested in those things,” Dr. Grunsfeld said.

Dr. Grunsfeld announced his retirement from NASA in April 2016. In October of that year, Dr. Zurbuchen was named as the new associate administrator for science.

He had a few goals coming into the job. “Rule 1,” he said, “is don’t break it.”

But he also felt that NASA leaders could do a better job. “I think it’s always easy to say, ‘Space is hard — that’s why we have management problems,’” Dr. Zurbuchen said. “But I just don’t think it’s a carte blanche. I think we should do our best job so if we get surprised, we can actually explain why we missed it.”

How NASA executed its ambitious missions “was really, really important because it actually gave trust in how we deal with taxpayers’ money,” he said. “Within just a few months, I terminated the first mission.”

The was the Radiation Budget Instrument, which was to have measured sunlight reflecting off the Earth. The project experienced technical problems and spiraling costs. “What I really felt was important is that we looked at the opportunity set and basically asked, ‘Is there a way to get more science or more science per dollar?’” Dr. Zurbuchen said.

For earth science data, NASA now buys much of it from commercial satellite companies instead of building its own spacecraft. “Close to 1,500 scientists within the United States are doing research on these data,” Dr. Zurbuchen said. “Totally new way of doing that.”

Dr. Zurbuchen, right, presenting the first image from the James Webb Space Telescope, along with Klaus Pontoppidan, left, Webb project scientist, to Bill Nelson, NASA’s administrator, before it was released to the public.Aubrey Gemignani/NASA

Not all of the new ways of doing business have worked. For example, NASA selected some missions that were to put scientific devices on commercial communication satellites headed to geostationary orbit, at altitudes of more than 22,000 miles. But with a shift in the telecommunications industry, there are fewer geostationary satellites being launched now. “We basically lost our rides,” Dr. Zurbuchen said. “So our commercial partnerships did not work. We’re sitting on the ground.”

The biggest challenge was getting the James Webb Space Telescope, which was going awry with technical and management problems, back on track. “Basically asking the question, ‘Is it worth finishing?’” Dr. Zurbuchen said. “Not knowing what the answer was and going through the process was really, really hard.”

The Webb telescope was finally launched in December 2021, and it provided Dr. Zurbuchen’s favorite moment, too, when he saw the telescope’s first deep-space image before President Biden released it publicly.

“At that point, there were only a couple of handfuls of humans that had seen that — with a telescope that we built and struggled with enormously,” Dr. Zurbuchen said. “It was a quintessential moment, both of human achievement but also history made, NASA style.”

#Space | https://sciencespies.com/space/at-nasa-thomas-zurbuchen-was-ready-to-let-some-missions-fail/

A Faked Kidnapping and Cocaine: A Montana Mine’s Descent Into Chaos

Just before 2 a.m. on April 18, 2018, Amy Price, the wife of the coal executive Larry Price Jr., called the police in Bluefield, Va., to report her husband missing. Police scoured Bluefield, a town of less than 10,000 people nestled in the Blue Ridge Mountains, and soon discovered Mr. Price’s white Mercedes at a deserted parking lot.

Mr. Price, a 42-year-old father of six, was an industrious businessman who ran surface operations at an underground mine, one of the nation’s largest, near Roundup, Mont. He also ran a motorcycle shop, Hawg Pit Cycles, that traded used Harley-Davidsons. And he had promised several investors big returns in coal. Recently, some of them had confronted Mr. Price about their money.

As night fell, a driver traveling along a state road some 20 miles away from Bluefield noticed a man on the roadside: a disheveled Mr. Price, who was rushed to a hospital. He told investigators he had been abducted by an outlaw biker gang that drugged him and took him to his motorcycle shop where they robbed him before loading him into a van and dumping him on the roadside. When surveillance cameras showed there hadn’t been a robbery, he changed his story, saying that the gang had asked him for coal train schedules for a scheme to traffic methamphetamines by rail.

The truth was, Mr. Price hadn’t been kidnapped at all. As he later admitted in court, he had staged his own kidnapping, a last-ditch attempt to escape investors’ wrath for embezzlement schemes totaling more than $20 million that he’d hatched with the president of the Montana coal mine.

The embezzlement and fake kidnapping were part of the unraveling of a coal company called Signal Peak Energy that also involved bribery, cocaine trafficking, firearms violations, worker safety and environmental infringements, a network of shell companies, a modern-day castle, an amputated finger and past links to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.

Larry Price, Jr., left, at the James F. Battin Federal Courthouse in Billings, Mont., in 2020.Larry Mayer/Billings-Gazette

A bulldozer moving coal tailings at the Signal Peak Mine.Louise Johns for The New York Times

Nine former Signal Peak executives, including Mr. Price, and their associates have been either convicted or charged as part of a broad federal investigation. Mr. Price is now serving time in a federal prison.Signal Peak’s former president and chief executive, Brad Hanson, who Mr. Price said was the mastermind behind the schemes, died at his home in Florida in 2020. The company itself was fined $1 million last year for failing to report worker injuries and for illegally dumping toxic slurry, chemicals and unprocessed soil containing heavy metals, arsenic and lead, into an abandoned section of the mine.

Attempts to reach Mr. Price in prison were unsuccessful. In written responses to questions, Signal Peak stressed that it had taken “swift and comprehensive remedial measures” after the misconduct came to light, terminating all employees involved, installing new executive leadership and revising its internal policies to prevent future wrongdoing.

Local ranchers and environmental groups that oppose the mine say Signal Peak Energy, which operates the Montana mine, 30 miles north of Billings, has become an extreme example of the opaque operators left behind in a declining industry as the biggest actors leave or go bankrupt. Coal use has shrunk by half from its peak in 2007 amid the shift to natural gas and renewables. Those left behind have an incentive to extract as much money as possible — and get out.

Last summer, a coalition of environmental groups petitioned both the federal government and the State of Montana to order the mine to cease operations pending a wider investigation, citing ongoing environmental and permit violations and its overall “destructive and lawless operations.”

That hasn’t stopped Signal Peak from planning a 7,000-acre expansion of the mine, though those plans have been repeatedly stopped by federal courts for failing to meet environmental standards.

Understand the Latest News on Climate Change

Card 1 of 5

Exxon’s climate research. A new study published in the journal Science found that starting in the late 1970s, Exxon’s scientists made remarkably accurate projections of just how much burning fossil fuels would warm the planet. Yet for years, the oil giant publicly cast doubt on climate science, and cautioned against any drastic move toward alternative resources.

A controversial appointment. The decision by the United Arab Emirates to select the head of its national oil company to oversee the COP28 climate talks in Dubai this year has drawn ire from environmental groups. The move reflects the complex balancing act the United Arab Emirates is trying to pull off as the oil exporter prepares for a renewable future.

Eight hot years. Scientists from the European Union’s Copernicus Climate Change Service reported that the last eight years were the warmest on record. Extreme summer temperatures in Europe, China and elsewhere contributed to 2022 being the fifth-hottest year on record; 2016 was the hottest year ever.

U.S. carbon emissions. America’s greenhouse gas emissions from energy and industry rose last year, moving the nation in the opposite direction from its climate goals, according to preliminary estimates by a nonpartisan research firm. Emissions ticked up 1.3 percent, even as renewable energy surpassed coal power nationwide for the first time in over six decades.

Parasitic populations According to a groundbreaking new study that analyzed 85 parasitic species, the majority of them suffered population declines over 140 years. The decline, seemingly driven by warming temperatures, suggests another unexpected way that climate change can harm ecosystems.

On a recent afternoon, Signal Peak’s new chief executive, Parker Phipps, ushered a visiting reporter from his office in a squat two-story building perched at the mine’s edge, saying he was unable to speak with reporters. He cited the “tremendous amount of litigation” against the firm. Nearby, coal trundled up a conveyor and onto a vast, black mound.

Steve Charter, a member of the local environmental group the Bull Mountain Land Alliance, said mine workers used an excavator to tear up a watering hole used by his cattle.Louise Johns for The New York Times

Mr. Charter’s ranch. Signal Peak now controls much of the ranch land in the area and is canceling leases ranchers have held for more than half a century.Louise Johns for The New York Times

A ‘Bastion’ of Malfeasance

Miners have dug for coal in the outcrops of the Bull Mountains, a range of grasslands and sagebrush in southern Montana crisscrossed by cattle trails, since the late 1800s. But after booming through the 1960s, mining in the region declined precipitously. Then, in 2008, the Boich Companies, run by the Ohio-based billionaire Wayne Boich, and FirstEnergy Corp, one of the nation’s largest investor-owned utilities, bought the Bull Mountains No. 1 coal mine for $125 million and renamed it Signal Peak Energy. Two years later, the Gunvor Group, an oil and commodities trading firm registered in Cyprus, assumed a stake in the company.

Signal Peak embarked on an intensive method of digging coal from the ground, known as longwall mining, in which miners systematically mine coal from panels of earth several miles long and hundreds of feet wide

Mr. Price‌, who had worked mining jobs in the coal fields of Southwest Virginia, t‌ook a job with Signal Peak in 2009‌. At the mine, Mr. Price rose through the ranks to become vice president in charge of surface operations, a position that brought him in close contact with Signal Peak’s new chief executive, Bradley Hanson. On the side, Mr. Price operated a private business called 3 Solutions, which supplied Signal Peak with industrial chemicals.

At his trial, Mr. Price painted Mr. Hanson as the mastermind behind a series of schemes to defraud investors at two separate companies, as well as Signal Peak itself, of more than $20 million. Yet a federal judge found Mr. Price was responsible for the fraudulent activity. In one scheme, he convinced a Wyoming ‌firm called Three Blind Mice to lend 3 Solutions $7.5 million for a contract that did not exist.

The money supported an extravagant lifestyle. In Billings, he lived with his family in the area’s largest home:a 26,000-square foot, 10-bedroom stone castle. It had a tower, moat, drawbridge, glass elevator, bowling alley, swimming pools and an indoor shooting range with bank vault doors. At his sentencing, Mr. Price admitted that the full scope of the embezzlement was closer to $40 million.

But Mr. Price was not simply a rogue element at an otherwise reputable company. By 2018, the mine had become, in the words of United States attorneys working on the case, a “bastion of unreported injuries and malfeasance.”

The stone mansion in Billings, in the style of a castle, that was built by Mr. Price in 2014. It now has a new owner.Louise Johns for The New York Times

One United States attorney cited “utter disregard for environmental and worker health and safety standards” at Signal Peak. Louise Johns for The New York Times

According to Department of Justice statements, Dale Lee Musgrave, Signal Peak’s vice president of underground operations at the time, pressured mine employees not to report injuries that had occurred while on duty, using overt and implicit pressure, threats and bribes — actions which gave the mine “the veneer of an outstanding safety record.”

In 2018, according to the Department of Justice, Mr. Musgrave instructed an employee who had crushed his finger while loading mining materials to say that the injury was unrelated to his job, telling him that he would “make it worthwhile.” Mr. Musgrave eventually gave the employee, whose finger had to be partially amputated, $2,000 in cash.

Federal investigators who were looking into activities at the mine then noticed multiple mysterious FedEx shipments arriving at Mr. Musgrave’s residence — 27 such shipments just in the first few months of 2019. When they intercepted one, they found small bags of cocaine inside. In December 2021, Mr. Musgrave pleaded guilty to conspiracy to submit false statements in records. Under a plea agreement, prosecutors dismissed two counts of cocaine trafficking.

Last year, Signal Peak was given a criminal sentence and a $1 million fine for willfully violating health and safety standards. In a broad summary of the case, United States Attorney Leif M. Johnson underscored the “utter disregard for environmental and worker health and safety standards.”

Industry experts say the criminal activity points to a bigger mystery: Despite the embezzlement and despite the coal industry’s protracted decline, the company has been able to survive. Many of Signal Peak’s better-positioned industry peers lost money on coal exports and went bankrupt.

“It never quite made sense to me,” said Clark Williams-Derry, an energy finance analyst at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis. “How did Signal Peak even stay afloat?”

Shell Companies

Pat and Maureen Thiele run a small, 50-acre ranch in Roundup, just outside of the boundaries of the Signal Peak mine. The small herd that grazes on the couple’s land, as well as their hardscrabblegarden, rely on water they fear is under threat from the mine, and Signal Peak’s expansion plans would bring the drilling under their property.

“It’s marching toward us,” Mrs. Thiele said. “It’s coming close, and damage to our land and our aquifer is becoming more likely.”

The couple are two in a handful of ranchers in the area who are upset about the damage Signal Peak has done to the land.

Steve Charter, a member of the local environmental group the Bull Mountain Land Alliance, said that in 2020 mine workers used an excavator to tear up a watering hole that provided water for his cattle. Now the company, which controls much of the ranch land in the area, is canceling leases ranchers have held for more than half a century.

“It’s like dealing with the mob,” he said.

Pat Theile, center in hat, and Kit Nilson, left with headband, with members of the Bull Mountain Land Alliance, prepared to canvass the community about water quality.Louise Johns for The New York Times

An exposed coal seam on a ranch in the Bull Mountains.Louise Johns for The New York Times

Signal Peak said Mr. Charter’s watering hole, made of old tires, had posed “a significant risk” to its employees and the environment. And by canceling leases, the mine said, it was merely exercising its land rights.

In recent months, Mr. Thiele has been consumed by a new pastime: digging into the multinational corporations that lurk behind Signal Peak, an attempt to understand the corporate forces that ranchers like him are up against.

“It’s important for us to know who we’re dealing with,” he said during a recent interview at his home, about a 10-minute drive from the mine.

In painstakingly compiled handwritten notes and diagrams, Mr. Thiele laid out the corporate structure: Signal Peak is technically owned by two shell companies, paper-only businesses with minimal disclosure rules, that obscure the fact that they are controlled by a trio of out-of-state corporations. What’s more, he was stunned to learn, those corporations are embroiled in their own scandals.

One is FirstEnergy, the Ohio-based utility that invested $400 million to open the underground mine in 2009 with the investment firm Boich Group. In 2021, the company admitted to funneling tens of millions of dollars in bribes to state legislators and regulators to advance a $1 billion bailout for aging nuclear and coal-fired power plants. The Justice Department fined FirstEnergy a record $230 million in a sprawling bribery case, the largest ever in Ohio. A spokeswoman for FirstEnergy said that while FirstEnergy has a stake in the company that operates the mine, it does not run the site.

Mr. Boich has also been implicated in the case. According to local news reports and a federal criminal complaint, he made substantial donations to the dark money organization at the center of the scandal. He has not been charged with any crime. A spokesman for Mr. Boich said the billionaire’s political contributions had taken place in strict accordance with the law.

The third owner is the Gunvor Group, a multinational trading company formerly co-owned by Gennady N. Timchenko, a Russian billionaire and confidante of Mr. Putin. Signal Peak is the only coal mine owned by Gunvor, which specializes in trading commodities like oil, gas and minerals, not producing them.

For years, the United States Treasury maintained that Mr. Putin held investments in Gunvor and may have had access to Gunvor funds. After Russia invaded Crimea in 2014, the State Department placed sanctions on Mr. Timchenko and he announced that he had sold his interest in the company.

A Gunvor spokesman stressed that Mr. Timchenko now “had absolutely zero involvement with Gunvor in any way” and called any alleged links with President Putin “old and entirely baseless.” Gunvor has “been seeking to divest its share in Signal Peak, which holds no strategic value for our company,” he added.

Environmental groups have alleged in complaints to state and federal regulators that, by using shell companies, the mine is violating requirements to clearly disclose the identity of its owners. These groups worry that the current owners, racked by their own scandals, will be able to walk away from their obligations — to restore land or water degraded by the mining, for example.

Ms. Nilson and her nephew, Boyd Charter, at one of their ranch’s watering holes. “The thing is, we know coal is on its way out,’’ she said. “But when they do finish up, they’ll be able to walk away and we’ll never see them again.”Louise Johns for The New York Times

A subsidence crack on Steve Charter’s property.Louise Johns for The New York Times

So far, the environmental groups have been unsuccessful. This year, the Interior Department, said it believed the mine was violating ownership disclosure rulesand had failed to update parts of its mining permit. But the department said it could not find adequate proof of any imminent danger to public health or the environment.

“There’s a history of companies creating shells, and the owners walking away, leaving taxpayers to pick up the mess,” said Anne Hedges, a director at the Montana Environmental Information Center, a local nonprofit group. “And they’ve all already operated like they’re above the law.”

Signal Peak has supporters in the community, including Sue Olson, a local rancher who sits on the board of a philanthropic foundation funded by Signal Peak.

“Signal Peak mine did have some very bad apples,” she said. “But they’ve been caught, and the mine is now operating as a respected, honest business.”

Mr. Charter, the rancher, recently zigzagged to the top of his ranch on Bull Mountain, stopping to examine the latest crack that has appeared in the hard ground, a crevice several hundred feet long.

Below was a sweeping vista of Montana’s grassy plains, hazy with the smoke of distant wildfires. Mr. Charter’s finances have already been squeezed by the big meatpackers that have consolidated control of the American livestock industry. The mine is a more elusive adversary.

“Coal is in its death throes,” he said, “and it’s taking us down with it.”

#Environment | https://sciencespies.com/environment/a-faked-kidnapping-and-cocaine-a-montana-mines-descent-into-chaos/

Why Dolphins Help Fishermen in Southern Brazil

Bottlenose dolphins help Brazilian fishermen pull in their catch, and researchers have worked out what the marine mammals get from the cooperative hunting.

As dolphins move in, overhead video captures fishers casting their nets while hydrophones record the marine mammals’ echolocation clicks, which the fishermen say they can feel.Cantor et al.

Every summer in waters off the town of Laguna in Brazil’s southeast corner, fishers wade out into estuary canals to cast their nets in hopes of catching migratory mullet fish. The water is murky, and the fish are difficult to spot. However, the fishers have help from an unexpected quarter: bottlenose dolphins that push the prey toward the nets.

The two species of predators have coordinated their fishing for generations.

“The experience of fishing with dolphins is unique,” said Wilson F. Dos Santos, a Laguna fisherman who’s been casting nets alongside the dolphins for 50 years. He learned the practice when he was 15, taking his father coffee and food as he fished and watching the aquatic partners at work. He added that working with the dolphins “helps with our family income,” because human families eat what they catch.

In research published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, a team of Brazilian scientists reported that dolphins might benefit from the cooperation as much as their terrestrial mammal counterparts did. Those that fish with humans seem to live longer than other dolphins in the area do.

“Human-wildlife cooperation in general is a rare phenomenon at a global scale,” said Mauricio Cantor, a biologist at Oregon State University and an author of the paper. “Usually humans gain the benefit, and nature pays the cost. But this interaction has been happening for over 150 years.”

Humans have worked with other species to find food for millenniums, including honeyguides in southeast Africa and Indigenous American accounts of hunting alongside wolves. And net-casting fishers working with dolphins isn’t unique to Brazil — the practice has also been observed in Mauritania, Myanmar and India, but the bottlenoses of Laguna are the most famous. The local population of about five dozen cooperative dolphins has been systematically monitored since 2007, said Fábio G. Daura-Jorge, a biologist at the Federal University of Santa Catarina in Brazil and an author of the paper. In 2017, the team began surveilling both the fish and dolphins with GPS, drones and sonar.

Dolphin and fishermen in league at Praia da Tesoura, in Laguna.Fábio G. Daura-Jorge/Federal University of Santa Catarina

Fishermen in the Laguna. The scientists found that the dolphins’ strategy had clear benefits. Those that hunted with humans were 13 percent more likely to survive to adulthood. Alexandre Machado/Federal University of Santa Catarina

The team found that the dolphins gave a cue — usually a sudden, deep dive — to signal that they’d driven prey within reach of fishers’ nets. Eighty-six percent of the successful catches during the study period came from fishers reading dolphins’ behaviors, Dr. Cantor said. Careful observation and timing were key: Those who cast nets too late or missed dolphin cues were less likely to catch anything.

The dolphins also time their foraging carefully. The team of researchers used hydrophones to measure the animals’ echolocation clicks, the rate of which increased as the nets hit the water. When a fisher made a successful cast, the dolphins homed in on disoriented mullet or plucked a few fish from inside the net. When fishers mistimed their cast or failed to respond to the dolphins’ cues, the dolphins didn’t strike.

“The dolphins know what they are doing,” Dr. Daura-Jorge said. “They’re taking advantage of the fishers’ actions to actively forage.”

The human participants proved to be keen observers, too. The fishers shared a wealth of experience with the researchers about how the dolphins and fish behaved, and they knew how to recognize the dolphins that made good fishing partners. The fishers identified their partners’clicking and told the researchers that they felt the buzz of the echolocation in their legs when the dolphins “cry out.”

The strategy has clear benefits for the dolphins, Dr. Cantor said: Those that hunted with humans were 13 percent more likely to survive to adulthood. Cooperative dolphins tended to linger near the fishing grounds that they shared with humans, while other dolphins that traveled more widely throughout the area’s water were three times more likely to end up tangled in illegal fish nets.

While this partnership helps both sides, the practice has been in decline over the last decade, Dr. Cantor said. Commercial operations overfish mullet stocks across southern Brazil. As fish numbers drop, individual dolphins and fishers hunt together less.

Because the whole system depends on both sides having a careful understanding of each other’s cues, Dr. Daura-Jorge said, it can easily break down. That could make Laguna’s bottlenose dolphins appear to be more competitors than partners, placing them under further threat.

“Safeguarding the cultural tradition of fishers and dolphins is critical to keep them cooperating and also important to conserve the population of dolphins,” he said.

Regulation of industrial mullet fishing and a crackdown on illegal fisheries could help to ensure that there are enough fish to go around, Dr. Cantor said. Many area participants like Mr. Dos Santos are also committed to the practice, which is a point of local pride and draws in tourists.

“It’s an interaction that goes beyond only the material benefits,” Dr. Cantor said. “Trying to preserve cultural diversity is an indirect way of preserving biological diversity, too.”

#Environment | https://sciencespies.com/environment/why-dolphins-help-fishermen-in-southern-brazil/

Why I Hunt for Sidewalk Fossils

These oft-overlooked records invite us to imagine what has been and what might be.

A paleontologist once told me that city sidewalks hold snapshots. If I trained my gaze toward my feet, he said, I would find evidence of all kinds of commutes: traces of hopping birds, the soles of humans’ shoes, restless leaves that fell and sank into wet concrete at just the right moment. I might see a smattering of little paw prints zigging, zagging, doubling back, evidence of important rodent business that didn’t often overlap with mine.

These marks are too recent to pass muster with scientific sticklers, but in all respects except age, they are fossils. There are many ways to make one. Some form when a creature is entombed in sediment: Water percolates through, flush with minerals, and over time the mixture infiltrates the bones, where it settles and forms stone. Other fossils are casts, made, for instance, when a shell dissolves and leaves behind a mold that eventually fills with sediment, which hardens into rock. But not all fossils involve remains; some catalog movements. These are the kind that stipple our sidewalks — nascent trace fossils, records of fleeting contact.

Throughout the pandemic, I turned to nature to track time and step outside myself. I photographed the sweetgum tree outside my Brooklyn window, noting when it leafed into a bushy chlorophylled curtain or when it dropped fruit that fell to the ground like unshattered ornaments. Most afternoons of that first lonely spring, I roamed a cemetery. When magnolia blossoms smudged the scene pink, I stood under the canopies until wind splashed the petals against my shoulders.

More on Birds

• An Epic Flight: In search of an endless summer, bar-tailed godwits fly 7,000 miles each year — from Alaska to New Zealand. And they do it without stopping to eat, drink or rest.
• An Uneven Crisis: The risk of extinction, a study suggests, is not randomly or equally spread across the avian family. Instead, the most distinctive birds are likely to vanish first.
• Hammering Away: A study shows that woodpeckers do not absorb shocks during pecking and they likely aren’t being concussed either.
• A Beloved Bird Call: The corncrake’s loud cry was once a common sound of summer in Ireland, but these days it can seldom be heard. Efforts are underway to bring it back. 

I was lucky, of course, to be simply scared and lonely — not dead, not intubated, not choosing between peril and paycheck. But time was slippery, and I felt stuck in my own brain, a foggy, trembling ecosystem I had no interest in studying. By early 2022, I was cocooned in my partner’s Morningside Heights apartment. On weekend mornings, we shuffled around the neighborhood, and each volunteered to notice something new: a startling mushroom, the pale bellies of pigeons waterfalling down a facade before flocking skyward. I became fixated on sidewalk fossils. Fossil-finding outings were a relief — an invitation to crouch, touch, lose myself in evidence of skittering and scrabbling, tethering myself to a past and a future.

Once I started noticing these impressions, it was fun to imagine myself as a paleontologist of the urban present.

Because sidewalk fossils are essentially the same color as the surrounding concrete, they’re most visible when light rakes across them; a fossil that’s elusive at noon might announce itself at dawn or dusk. So I timed a second daily walk for the hour when the light fled. Late afternoons introduced me to tiny forked footprints that marked the scene of, perhaps, an avian skirmish. There were others: a dog’s paws, three-quarters of a shoe. Though ichnologists, who study trace fossils, might discount leaves, I marveled at those too: most of a London plane and a ginkgo, with its corrugated fan. Across from a closed-up snack cart, I knelt until the cold concrete prickled my knees. I wriggled out of my mitten and traced a leaf’s sharp, diagonal veins, its saw-toothed sides.

When scientists encounter a fossil, they often try to puzzle out an explanation of how it got there. Maybe an animal was stranded or washed off its feet or chased by predators. Once I started noticing these impressions, it was fun to imagine myself as a paleontologist of the urban present. A bonanza of bird feet made me wonder if someone had sprinkled seeds or dropped a bagel. How long ago? What kind? When a leaf didn’t seem to match any of the nearby trees, I wondered if it was an interloper, blown in from blocks away or if it testified to an ecological eviction — a tree yanked out and replaced with another species or swapped for sidewalk. The fossils fastened my attention to something tangible but also invited it to wander and to think about city streets as collages of past and present, about how our nonhuman neighbors are architects, too. How we all shed traces of ourselves, whether we know it or not.

Of course, there is more significant proof of the past. Mammoths sometimes turn up in farmers’ fields, their tusks curved like scythes abandoned in the dirt. Parades of dinosaur footprints still march along the banks or beds of some prehistoric rivers and seas. Those are awesome, showy and obvious. I line up to see them; I happily gawk. But it was a tiny thrill to encounter evidence of the past that was subtle and recent, proof that others were out there. The sidewalk fossils felt intimate — the paleontological equivalent of a raft of letters secreted away beneath a floorboard.

Only they’re not actually rare. When sidewalks are repaired, birds and other animals ignore attempts to keep them pristine. Leaves do whatever the wind demands. These fossils are easy to find, and we’re lucky to have them. When I was lingering in the worst parts of my brain, sidewalk fossils dislodged me. Unlike the many fossils that represent stillness, the moment when an animal died and the place it remained unless humans carved it free, sidewalk fossils are often peeks into lives that continued. The birds flew somewhere; the dogs, I hope, went on to wag over many sticks and smells. As the sun sank and I trudged home, the fossils — these little flukes, these interesting accidents — were reminders of small, exhilarating life.

---

Jessica Leigh Hester is a science journalist whose first book is “Sewer” (Bloomsbury Academic, 2022).

#News | https://sciencespies.com/news/why-i-hunt-for-sidewalk-fossils/

What Happened to All of Science’s Big Breakthroughs?

A new study finds a steady drop since 1945 in disruptive feats as a share of the world’s booming enterprise in scientific and technological advancement.

Miracle vaccines. Videophones in our pockets. Reusable rockets. Our technological bounty and its related blur of scientific progress seem undeniable and unsurpassed. Yet analysts now report that the overall pace of real breakthroughs has fallen dramatically over the past almost three-quarters of a century.

This month in the journal Nature, the report’s researchers told how their study of millions of scientific papers and patents shows that investigators and inventors have made relatively few breakthroughs and innovations compared with the world’s growing mountain of science and technology research. The three analysts found a steady drop from 1945 through 2010 in disruptive finds as a share of the booming venture, suggesting that scientists today are more likely to push ahead incrementally than to make intellectual leaps.

“We should be in a golden age of new discoveries and innovations,” said Michael Park, an author of the paper and a doctoral candidate in entrepreneurship and strategic management at the University of Minnesota.

The new finding of Mr. Park and his colleagues suggests that investments in science are caught in a spiral of diminishing returns and that quantity in some respects is outpacing quality. While unaddressed in the study, it also raises questions about the extent to which science can open new frontiers and sustain the kind of boldness that unlocked the atom and the universe and what can be done to address the shift away from pioneering discovery. Earlier studies have pointed to slowdowns in scientific progress but typically with less rigor.

Mr. Park, along with Russell J. Funk, also of the University of Minnesota, and Erin Leahey, a sociologist at the University of Arizona, based their study on an enhanced kind of citation analysis that Dr. Funk helped to devise. In general, citation analysis tracks how researchers cite one another’s published works as a way of separating bright ideas from unexceptional ones in a system flooded with papers. Their improved method widens the analytic scope.

“It’s a very clever metric,” said Pierre Azoulay, a professor of technological innovation, entrepreneurship and strategic management at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “I was giddy when I saw it. It’s like a new toy.”

Researchers have long sought objective ways to assess the state of science, which is seen as vital to economic growth, national pride and military strength. It became more difficult to do so as published papers soared in number to more than one million annually. Each day, that’s more than 3,000 papers — by any standard, an indecipherable blur.

Defying the surge, experts have debated the value of incremental strides versus “Eureka!” moments that change everything known about a field.

The new study could deepen the debate. One surprise is that discoveries hailed popularly as groundbreaking are seen by the authors of the new study as often representing little more than routine science, and true leaps as sometimes missing altogether from the conversation.

For instance, the top breakthrough on the study’s list of examples is a gene-splicing advance that’s poorly known to popular science. It let foreign DNA be inserted into human and animal cells rather than just bacteria ones. The New York Times referred to it in a 1983 note of four paragraphs. Even so, the feat produced a run of awards for its authors and their institution, Columbia University, as well as almost $1 billion in licensing fees as it lifted biotechnology operations around the world.

In contrast, the analysts would see two of this century’s most celebrated findings as representing triumphs of ordinary science rather than edgy leaps. The mRNA vaccines that successfully battle the coronavirus were rooted in decades of unglamorous toil, they noted.

So too, the 2015 observation of gravitational waves — subtle ripples in the fabric of space-time — was no unforeseen breakthrough but rather the confirmation of a century-old theory that required decades of hard work, testing and sensor development.

“Disruption is good,” said Dashun Wang, a scientist at Northwestern University who used the new analytic technique in a 2019 study. “You want novelty. But you also want everyday science.”

The three analysts uncovered the trend toward incremental advance while using the enhanced form of citation analysis to scrutinize nearly 50 million papers and patents published from 1945 to 2010. They looked across four categories — the life sciences and biomedicine, the physical sciences, technology and the social sciences — and found a steady drop in what they called “disruptive” findings. “Our results,” they wrote, “suggest that slowing rates of disruption may reflect a fundamental shift in the nature of science and technology.”

Their novel method — and citation analysis in general — gets analytic power from the requirement that scientists cite studies that helped to shape their published findings. Starting in the 1950s, analysts began to tally those citations as a way to identify research of importance. It was a kind of scientific applause meter.

But the count could be misleading. Some authors cited their own research quite often. And stars of science could receive lots of citations for unremarkable finds. Worst of all, some of the most highly cited papers turned out to involve minuscule improvements in popular techniques used widely by the scientific community.

The new method looks at citations more deeply to separate everyday work from true breakthroughs more effectively. It tallies citations not only to the analyzed piece of research but to the previous studies it cites. It turns out that the previous work is cited far more often if the finding is routine rather than groundbreaking. The analytic method turns that difference into a new lens on the scientific enterprise.

The measure is called the CD index after its scale, which goes from consolidating to disrupting the body of existing knowledge.

Dr. Funk, who helped to devise the CD index, said the new study was so computationally intense that the team at times used supercomputers to crunch the millions of data sets. “It took a month or so,” he said. “This kind of thing wasn’t possible a decade ago. It’s just now coming within reach.”

The novel technique has aided other investigators, such as Dr. Wang. In 2019, he and his colleagues reported that small teams are more innovative than large ones. The finding was timely because science teams over the decades have shifted in makeup to ever-larger groups of collaborators.

In an interview, James A. Evans, a University of Chicago sociologist who was a co-author of that paper with Dr. Wang, called the new method elegant. “It came up with something important,” he said. Its application to science as a whole, he added, suggests not only a drop in the return on investment but a growing need for policy reform.

“We have extremely ordered science,” Dr. Evans said. “We bet with confidence on where we invest our money. But we’re not betting on fundamentally new things that have the potential to be disruptive. This paper suggests we need a little less order and a bit more chaos.”

#News | https://sciencespies.com/news/what-happened-to-all-of-sciences-big-breakthroughs/