scientificamerican--2020-09-13--The Enduring Mystery of Earth's Water

The Enduring Mystery of Earth's Water

You have to go to extreme lengths to find places on Earth that don ’ t reveal that they ’ re part of a water-rich planet .
Even the highest and driest deserts , like the Atacama Plateau in South America , still get a minimum of a couple of millimeters of annual precipitation on average ( although there are places where we don ’ t yet know what the average is because it ’ s simply not rained for years ) .
And if you whip out your handy mass spectrometer on a desert walkabout the chances are that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at least a few atmospheric water molecules .
Go elsewhere , and it ’ s hard to imagine anything but a water-logged world .
More than 70 percent of Earth ’ s surface is covered in oceans and roughly 97 percent of the surface water is in those oceans , leaving a scant 1 percent as freshwater .
Water is also seldom static , whether it ’ s flowing in ocean currents or being evaporated and precipitated .
Averaged out over the planet there is about 100 centimeters of rainfall a year , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surface area of around 5.1x1018 square centimeters .
In other words , doing the back-of-the-envelope calculation , some 510 trillion metric tons of water gets evaporated and then re-precipitated every year on Earth .
But the catch is that we don ’ t really know where all of this water came from in the first place .
For a long while our picture of the formation of a rocky planet like the Earth has involved a violent , hot assembly some 4.5 billion years ago out of comparatively dry material in the inner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ along later , with proposals for possible delivery by comets from the chill , frozen outer solar system , or by rocky but still volatile-rich meteoritic infall .
But these options have proven tricky to justify completely for a variety of reasons .
Comets , for instance , often ( but not always ) have a deuterium concentration that doesn ’ t match what we see in Earth ’ s water—limiting their likely contribution .
Similarly , water-rich rocky meteoritic material—so-called carbonaceous chondrites—have isotopic differences that could also limit how much they contributed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same time , the representative type of material for building the entirety of a rocky Earth ( and matching the planet ’ s overall isotopic composition in elements like oxygen and calcium ) seems to closely resemble what ’ s called enstatite chondrite .
Chunks of enstatite chondrite are still around in the solar system , and occasionally fall as meteorites .
But they ’ ve been thought to be too dry to be involved in Earth ’ s water supply .
Now , in a work reported by Piani , et al @ @ @ @ @ @ @ analysis of the composition of 13 enstatite chondrite meteorite samples reveals a much higher than expected hydrogen content .
Extrapolating from these numbers the researchers claim that if this is the type of protoplanetary material that built Earth , it could have resulted in a total , initial water content of at least three times the present mass of water in our oceans .
The same material could have also provided a starter mix of atmospheric nitrogen to the young planet .
This possibility is enormously appealing for its relative simplicity : Our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the very beginning , with little need to invoke any more complex evolution except for a small drizzling from comets and other outer solar system material .
Whether or not this idea holds up to further scientific scrutiny , it ’ s a beautiful reminder that even the simplest things in our lives , like a glass of water or a shower in the morning , are actually windows into the deepest origins of everything we know .

You have to go to extreme lengths to find places on Earth that don’t reveal that they’re part of a water-rich planet. Even the highest and driest deserts, like the Atacama Plateau in South America, still get a minimum of a couple of millimeters of annual precipitation on average (although there are places where we don’t yet know what the average is because it’s simply not rained for years). And if you whip out your handy mass spectrometer on a desert walkabout the chances are that you’ll be able to detect at least a few atmospheric water molecules.
Go elsewhere, and it’s hard to imagine anything but a water-logged world. More than 70 percent of Earth’s surface is covered in oceans and roughly 97 percent of the surface water is in those oceans, leaving a scant 1 percent as freshwater. Water is also seldom static, whether it’s flowing in ocean currents or being evaporated and precipitated. Averaged out over the planet there is about 100 centimeters of rainfall a year, but that’s across a total surface area of around 5.1x1018 square centimeters. In other words, doing the back-of-the-envelope calculation, some 510 trillion metric tons of water gets evaporated and then re-precipitated every year on Earth.
But the catch is that we don’t really know where all of this water came from in the first place. For a long while our picture of the formation of a rocky planet like the Earth has involved a violent, hot assembly some 4.5 billion years ago out of comparatively dry material in the inner solar system. Water would have come along later, with proposals for possible delivery by comets from the chill, frozen outer solar system, or by rocky but still volatile-rich meteoritic infall. But these options have proven tricky to justify completely for a variety of reasons. Comets, for instance, often (but not always) have a deuterium concentration that doesn’t match what we see in Earth’s water—limiting their likely contribution. Similarly, water-rich rocky meteoritic material—so-called carbonaceous chondrites—have isotopic differences that could also limit how much they contributed to a young planet.
At the same time, the representative type of material for building the entirety of a rocky Earth (and matching the planet’s overall isotopic composition in elements like oxygen and calcium) seems to closely resemble what’s called enstatite chondrite. Chunks of enstatite chondrite are still around in the solar system, and occasionally fall as meteorites. But they’ve been thought to be too dry to be involved in Earth’s water supply.
Now, in a work reported by Piani, et al. in the journal Science, an analysis of the composition of 13 enstatite chondrite meteorite samples reveals a much higher than expected hydrogen content. Extrapolating from these numbers the researchers claim that if this is the type of protoplanetary material that built Earth, it could have resulted in a total, initial water content of at least three times the present mass of water in our oceans. The same material could have also provided a starter mix of atmospheric nitrogen to the young planet.
This possibility is enormously appealing for its relative simplicity: Our wet world was simply made this way from the very beginning, with little need to invoke any more complex evolution except for a small drizzling from comets and other outer solar system material. Whether or not this idea holds up to further scientific scrutiny, it’s a beautiful reminder that even the simplest things in our lives, like a glass of water or a shower in the morning, are actually windows into the deepest origins of everything we know.


scientificamerican--2020-09-14--Structure and Chemistry Dictate How Cicada Wings Repel Water and Kill Bacteria

Nature often inspires engineering .
Cicada wings , for example , have long tantalized researchers with their water-repellent and antimicrobial properties , which would be useful to replicate in manufactured products .
But previous studies involved totally removing the wings ' surface chemicals , sometimes damaging the wings and giving an incomplete picture of how those chemicals work together with the wings ' structure .
New research investigates substances coating cicada wings layer by layer , revealing a complex interplay between topography and chemistry .
Researchers analyzed two cicada species that each have a highly ordered pattern of tiny , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Previous work suggested nanopillars contribute to the insects ' ability to shed water and help kill microbes .
To avoid wing damage , the team tested a method called microwave-assisted extraction that had not been used on intact insect wings before , says Jessica Román-Kustas , an analytical chemist at Sandia National Laboratories .
Román-Kustas is lead author on the new study , which appeared in May in Advanced Materials Interfaces .
The method involved heating and cooling wings immersed in chloroform and methanol , analyzing layers of chemicals as they came @ @ @ @ @ @ @ days of sitting at the microwave with a timer and a computer , ” she says .
In both cicada species , the researchers found that the nanopillars ' chemical makeup is important for maintaining structural integrity .
“ When you remove the outer [ chemical ] layers from the nanopillar , the pillars become shorter and bend toward each other , ” says Marianne Alleyne , a biologist at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and a senior author on the study .
In the annual cicada Neotibicen pruinosus , this wilting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wings less water-repellent at first ( although they recovered some of that ability as more chemicals were removed ) .
Bacteria-killing activity actually increased as the first layers were removed but then decreased again as more compounds were stripped .
The team found that the cicada Magicicada cassinii , which emerges every 17 years and has shorter nanopillars , has surface chemicals that by themselves seem to have bactericidal properties—suggesting these cicadas rely more on their chemical components than structure to kill microbes .
“ It is clear … that different layers serve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a physical chemist at West Virginia University , who was not involved in the study , “ and the ability to probe only specific layers is very important [ to obtain ] a much better understanding of the overall physical properties ' dependence on chemical makeup.
” Understanding how chemicals do ( or do not ) affect structure may help scientists engineer better products .
“ By having this fundamental knowledge about how structure and chemistry relate to each other , ” Alleyne says , “ we can design new materials more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and chemistry … based on what we have observed in nature .
”

Nature often inspires engineering. Cicada wings, for example, have long tantalized researchers with their water-repellent and antimicrobial properties, which would be useful to replicate in manufactured products. But previous studies involved totally removing the wings' surface chemicals, sometimes damaging the wings and giving an incomplete picture of how those chemicals work together with the wings' structure. New research investigates substances coating cicada wings layer by layer, revealing a complex interplay between topography and chemistry.
Researchers analyzed two cicada species that each have a highly ordered pattern of tiny, conelike structures called nanopillars on their wings. Previous work suggested nanopillars contribute to the insects' ability to shed water and help kill microbes.
To avoid wing damage, the team tested a method called microwave-assisted extraction that had not been used on intact insect wings before, says Jessica Román-Kustas, an analytical chemist at Sandia National Laboratories. Román-Kustas is lead author on the new study, which appeared in May in Advanced Materials Interfaces. The method involved heating and cooling wings immersed in chloroform and methanol, analyzing layers of chemicals as they came off. “It [was] days of sitting at the microwave with a timer and a computer,” she says.
In both cicada species, the researchers found that the nanopillars' chemical makeup is important for maintaining structural integrity. “When you remove the outer [chemical] layers from the nanopillar, the pillars become shorter and bend toward each other,” says Marianne Alleyne, a biologist at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and a senior author on the study.
In the annual cicada Neotibicen pruinosus, this wilting effect was more extreme and made the wings less water-repellent at first (although they recovered some of that ability as more chemicals were removed). Bacteria-killing activity actually increased as the first layers were removed but then decreased again as more compounds were stripped. The team found that the cicada Magicicada cassinii, which emerges every 17 years and has shorter nanopillars, has surface chemicals that by themselves seem to have bactericidal properties—suggesting these cicadas rely more on their chemical components than structure to kill microbes.
“It is clear … that different layers serve different purposes,” says Terry Gullion, a physical chemist at West Virginia University, who was not involved in the study, “and the ability to probe only specific layers is very important [to obtain] a much better understanding of the overall physical properties' dependence on chemical makeup.”
Understanding how chemicals do (or do not) affect structure may help scientists engineer better products. “By having this fundamental knowledge about how structure and chemistry relate to each other,” Alleyne says, “we can design new materials more rationally, making choices about the structure and chemistry … based on what we have observed in nature.”


scientificamerican--2020-09-14--It's Time to Rein in Inflated Military Budgets

The devastating impact of the coronavirus pandemic and its economic fallout provide ample reason to reconsider what truly constitutes national security .
Such a reassessment is long overdue .
Despite the trillions of dollars Congress and successive administrations have lavished on the Pentagon since the turn of the century , the massive U.S. arsenal and fighting force deployed worldwide are powerless against grave , nonmilitary threats to national security—from a raging pandemic to the fact that tens of millions of Americans breathe foul air , drink tainted water , and struggle to pay for food , housing and health care @ @ @ @ @ @ @ priorities , the numbers seem especially misguided in an era of tight budgets to come .
By the Department of Defense ’ s own accounting , taxpayers spent $ 13.34 trillion on the U.S. military from 2000 through fiscal year 2019 in inflation-adjusted 2020 dollars .
Add to that another $ 3.18 trillion for the Veterans Administration , and the yearly average comes to a whopping $ 826 billion .
No other country ’ s military outlays come close .
In FY 2019 , the Pentagon ’ s budget was nearly three times @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and more than 10 times larger than Russia ’ s .
All told , the U.S. military budget in 2019 exceeded the next 10 countries ’ defense budgets combined and singlehandedly accounted for a hefty 38 percent of military spending worldwide .
While the Pentagon budget routinely eats up more than half of annual U.S. discretionary spending , a host of other interrelated threats that undermine national security writ large go chronically underfunded , including the current public health , environmental and climate crises , all of which disproportionately harm low-income communities and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crises predate the Trump administration .
But in its zeal to dismantle government regulations and slash critical programs , it has greatly exacerbated them .
At the same time , its fiscal year ( FY ) 2021 budget calls for spending $ 740.5 billion on the Pentagon , $ 100 billion more than when President Trump took office and the most since World War II .
In late July , both houses of Congress approved that request .
There are plenty of reasons to cut the Pentagon ’ s budget , but its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the most obvious .
If the Pentagon were a private corporation , gross mismanagement would have forced it into bankruptcy years ago .
Dysfunctional internal controls , aided and abetted by years of lax congressional and administration oversight , have enabled it to waste tens of billions of dollars annually , and the last 20 years are littered with a parade of overpriced , botched and bungled projects .
In just the first decade of this century , the Pentagon was forced to cancel a dozen ill-conceived , ineffective weapons programs that cost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Future Combat Systems program , a fleet of networked high-tech vehicles that did not work ; the Comanche helicopter , which—after 22 years in development—was never built ; and the 40-ton Crusader artillery gun , which never even made it to the prototype stage .
To put this example of managerial malfeasance in context , these canceled programs collectively cost more than the federal government spent on the Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) over the last five years .
At least the Pentagon killed those projects before they wasted any more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ does not know when to pull the plug .
The Army ’ s attempt to replace its outmoded Bradley tank is a case in point .
Over the last 17 years , it has blown an estimated $ 22.9 billion on three flawed prototypes , but in February—just three weeks after rejecting the third failed design—it issued yet another request for proposals from defense contractors .
Then there are programs the Pentagon continues to green-light with zero assurance they will ever perform as advertised .
Exhibit A : The Pentagon has wasted more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1990s on a ballistic missile defense system that has never been demonstrated to work in a real-world situation .
A spawn of Ronald Reagan ’ s Star Wars fantasy , the system—based in Alaska and California—will never be able to defend the continental United States from a limited nuclear attack .
Any country capable of launching a ballistic missile could easily foil the system with decoys and other countermeasures .
Another prime example is the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter .
Expected to cost $ 1.5 trillion over its lifespan , it has the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Defense ’ s most expensive weapons program of all time .
The 490 F-35s built since the first prototype flew 20 years ago continue to be plagued by a dozen serious flaws and nearly 900 software defects , and roughly half of the fleet in 2017 and 2018 was grounded for maintenance .
Regardless , the Pentagon still plans to buy 2,400 more F-35s over the next 25 years .
The F-35 is just one of the malfunctioning weapons systems on the Pentagon ’ s current $ 1.8-trillion shopping list of overpriced aircraft @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tanks .
Other poor performers include the $ 22-billion Zumwalt destroyer , a warship without a mission ; the $ 30-billion littoral combat ship , which the Navy is already mothballing because it is virtually unusable ; and the Air Force ’ s problem-plagued $ 43-billion KC-46 refueling tanker , which offers little improvement over current refuelers .
But it is not only exorbitant hardware that picks taxpayer pockets .
Pentagon administrative costs are also out of control .
A January 2015 report by a federal advisory panel found that the Pentagon could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by streamlining its bloated bureaucracy .
That sum alone is 15 times more than the $ 8.3 billion the Trump administration proposes to spend in the next fiscal year to fund the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention during one of the worst pandemics in modern history .
THE PENTAGON OFFERS LITTLE DEFENSE AGAINST HEALTH THREATS Speaking of the pandemic , while the Pentagon ’ s budget is bursting with overpriced , ineffective weapons systems and programs , U.S. health care providers were caught without an adequate supply of ventilators , respirators , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to COVID-19 .
With 190,000 deaths ( and counting ) in the U.S.—more than 20 percent of the reported world total—there is no question the extent to which the coronavirus presents an incalculable threat to national security .
Notwithstanding efforts by the Defense Intelligence Agency ’ s National Center for Medical Intelligence , which warned the White House in late February that the coronavirus would likely become a global pandemic , and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency , which is researching vaccines and funding clinical trials , the military was unable to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with COVID-19—has been of little use to the civilian health care system in combating it .
Granted , the military dispatched 740 military doctors , nurses and support staff to hospitals in Texas and California to help with coronavirus patients , and earlier this year , the Navy sent hospital ships to New York City and Los Angeles .
However , during the month the 1,000-bed , 1,200-person crew USNS Comfort was docked in midtown Manhattan , it treated only 182 patients , 70 percent of whom had COVID-19 , before returning to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Meanwhile , the 1,000-bed , 900-person crew Navy hospital ship USNS Mercy visited Los Angeles in late March , but by mid-April , the ship had treated just a few dozen patients while more than half dozen crew members tested positive for COVID-19 .
All told , Mercy doctors took care of only 77 patients , and , after a seven-and-a-half-week stay , the ship returned to its home port in San Diego .
These vignettes are just small pieces of a bigger story .
More significant , the hundreds of billions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the military every year siphons away money that could be spent to address serious flaws in the U.S. health care system .
Somehow , the U.S. manages to spend more on its military than the next 10 countries combined , but it is the only member of the 36-nation Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development ( OECD ) that does not provide universal health care coverage .
The result represents an undeniable threat to public health .
In the United States , more than 27 million people lacked health insurance before the pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their job-based health insurance between February and mid-May because of layoffs .
Prepandemic U.S. health care statistics are sobering enough .
The United States has been spending an estimated $ 3.6 trillion annually on health care—nearly twice as much as the average OECD country as a share of its economy—but less than 3 percent of that spending goes to public health and prevention .
The result ?
The U.S. has a lower life expectancy and a higher suicide rate than 10 other wealthy countries , including Australia , Canada , France , Germany @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have the highest rates of diabetes , hypertension and heart and lung disease , and an obesity rate that is double the OECD average—the very underlying medical conditions that increase vulnerability to COVID-19—and the numbers are proportionately higher for U.S. Black and Latinx populations .
Regardless , the Trump administration FY 2021 budget would slash funding for leading public health agencies by hundreds of millions of dollars .
The National Institutes of Health stands to lose $ 3 billion , for instance , and the administration budget also calls for cutting $ 500 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act over the next decade .
Environmental hazards pose an undeniable threat to national security that we largely know how to combat .
Thanks to the landmark environmental laws administered by the EPA and other agencies , the nation ’ s air and water is considerably cleaner than in the 1960s , when rivers caught fire and cities were choked with smog .
Even so , U.S. environmental standards need to be strengthened .
Today , at least 150 million people live in U.S. counties with unhealthy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people die every year from heart , lung and other diseases caused by microscopic air pollutant levels below EPA standards .
This microscopic particulate matter , measuring 2.5 microns or smaller ( PM2.5 ) , inordinately harms low-income communities and communities of color .
After a steady seven-year decline , fine particle pollution increased 5.5 percent on average between 2016 and 2018 nationwide , leading to nearly 10,000 additional premature deaths .
Researchers have identified a number of culprits , including increased driving , greater use of natural gas to produce electricity , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enforcement of environmental laws .
Compounding the problem , the EPA refused to strengthen its inadequate PM2.5 standards in April , just a week after a study found that COVID-19 causes a significantly higher death toll in areas with only slightly higher PM2.5 levels .
While most U.S. residents have access to safe drinking water , Flint , Mich ’ s lead problem is hardly an isolated case .
Dangerous contaminants—including arsenic , copper and lead—can still be found in tap water nationwide .
Community water systems serving nearly 30 million people , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and copper rule between January 2015 and March 2018 .
Another 16 million people across 35 states drink water contaminated by perchlorate , a rocket fuel component used on U.S. military bases that can cause neurological damage in infants and young children .
Regardless , in June , the Trump EPA defied a court order and finalized its decision to forego a standard limiting perchlorate ’ s concentration in drinking water .
The hundreds of billions the U.S. spends on the military annually do nothing to address these and other environmental threats .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Department is one of the world ’ s worst polluters .
Besides its perchlorate problem , its more than 4,000 installations across the country are home to 39,000 contaminated sites , 141 of which are listed among the EPA Superfund sites that are among the most polluted in the nation .
Likewise , the U.S. military ’ s nearly 800 installations overseas , which range from small radar stations to major airbases in more than 70 countries , have many of the same environmental problems as its domestic sites .
Compared to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safeguarding the environment are barely scraping by .
In FY 2020 , for example , the EPA ’ s budget was a measly $ 9 billion , practically a rounding error on the Pentagon ’ s ledger .
The agency ’ s budget has already shrunk by a quarter in inflation-adjusted dollars since 2010 , and now the Trump administration is proposing to cut the agency ’ s current budget by another 26 percent , eliminating 50 agency programs , including ones that address air and water pollution .
Any assessment of threats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ posed by human-caused climate change .
Marked by heat waves , droughts , wildfires , extreme precipitation , flooding and other severe weather events , global warming intensifies the health and environmental crises described above .
For example , the higher temperatures and increased rainfall brought on by climate change amplify the threat of infectious diseases such as Zika and Ebola , allowing parasites , viruses and bacteria transmitted by mosquitoes , ticks , flies and fleas to spread diseases to areas that did not experience them before .
Like infectious diseases , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through 2018 , an average of 702 U.S. residents died from extreme heat every year .
Meanwhile , the number of annual heat waves in 50 U.S. cities has tripled on average since 1960 , and in August , the Western half of the country baked .
More than 140 weather stations recorded record highs , California ’ s Death Valley hit 130 degrees Fahrenheit , and the National Weather Service issued an excessive heat advisory for 80 million people .
September has been just as bad , at least for Californians .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of 121 degrees F on Labor Day weekend , while the mercury in San Francisco hit 100 degrees F. Scientists predict it will only get worse unless we take dramatic steps to slash carbon emissions .
The 2018 National Climate Assessment , a collaboration of 14 federal agencies , forecast that heat stroke and similar heat-related illnesses will kill tens of thousands across the country every year by the end of the century .
Wildfires , drought and hurricanes—intensified by climate change—are also wreaking havoc .
This year alone , more than 7,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ drought , have burned in California , destroying some 2.5 million acres .
Besides California , Arizona , Colorado , Iowa and parts of Connecticut , Nevada and New Hampshire have faced severe drought conditions .
And in the Atlantic Ocean , a marine heat wave is triggering an an unusually active hurricane season .
To its credit , the Pentagon—unlike President Trump and 150 members of Congress—officially recognizes the climate threat .
A January 2019 Pentagon report on the subject , for instance , found that 46 of the U.S. military ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ climate change–related flooding , drought , desertification , wildfires and thawing permafrost .
Unfortunately for the planet , however , global warming is not an enemy the Pentagon is prepared to fight .
According to a June 2019 report by the Government Accountability Office , an independent congressional watchdog , military facilities are not moving quickly enough to address climate threats , and the Pentagon is not providing enough guidance on how to use climate change projections to protect bases or the personnel on them .
Worse yet , the Pentagon is also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Although it significantly reduced its fossil fuel consumption over the last two decades , the U.S. military is still the world ’ s top petroleum consumer and largest carbon polluter .
Between 2001 and 2017 , the five military branches collectively emitted 1.2 billion metric tons of carbon emissions , twice the annual output of all the passenger vehicles nationwide .
Left unchecked , the costs of the climate crisis will be astronomical .
Extreme weather events and other climate change–related impacts are already costing billions of dollars a year in property @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there were 44 unique extreme weather and climate events across the country with damages of $ 1 billion or more , amounting to a total of more than $ 460 billion .
Despite the undeniable risks , the Trump administration has targeted the Obama administration ’ s signature climate change efforts , seeking to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement , replacing the Clean Power Plan , which would have dramatically curbed power plant carbon pollution , and attempting to roll back the Obama administration ’ s groundbreaking vehicle fuel economy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ carbon emissions from cars and trucks .
The cost of meeting the Paris climate agreement ’ s goal of keeping global temperatures from rising more than 1.5 degrees Celsius ( 2.7 degrees F ) is estimated to run $ 1.6 trillion to $ 3.8 trillion a year .
Imagine the boon to national—and international—security if the United States invested the $ 1.8 trillion the Pentagon plans to spend on new weapons systems in clean energy , advanced batteries and related technology to curb the carbon emissions that drive climate change .
In late @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Senate failed to keep military spending in check .
Their respective versions of the National Defense Authorization Act ( NDAA ) received quite a bit of media attention for defying President Trump by calling for removing Confederate names from military bases , but in the end , both chambers signed off on the administration ’ s bloated top-line budget request .
Perhaps the least deserving of these expenditures is the $ 44.5 billion budget for nuclear weapons programs at the Department of Defense and at the Energy Department ’ s National Nuclear Security @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over last year ’ s allocation .
If there is any place to start cutting the military budget , it is the nuclear arsenal .
The United States far outspends every other member of the nuclear club .
The U.S. FY 2019 outlay of $ 35.4 billion , for instance , accounted for nearly half of the $ 72.9 billion the nine nuclear-armed countries collectively spent on nuclear weapons that year , three times the $ 10.4 billion China spent and four times the $ 8.5 billion Russia spent .
U.S. allies France @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the United Kingdom , meanwhile , combined to spend $ 18 billion , roughly half of the U.S. nuclear weapons budget .
There is no legitimate security justification for maintaining the outsized U.S. arsenal .
A single U.S. nuclear-armed submarine , for instance , is capable of carrying warheads that are collectively nearly 10 times more powerful than all the bombs dropped during World War II , including the two atomic bombs .
One full salvo from a single sub could wipe out two dozen cities—and the Navy has a fleet of 12 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the U.S. nuclear arsenal could be trimmed considerably without jeopardizing security , according to Fred Kaplan , a longtime military affairs reporter and author of The Bomb : Presidents , Generals , and the Secret History of Nuclear War .
“ During the Obama administration , ” Kaplan wrote in a May column , “ after a deep analysis of the nuclear war plan and its requirements , senior officials , including the four-star head of Strategic Command , agreed that the nuclear arsenal could be cut by one-third without any damage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go should be the 400 U.S. intercontinental ballistic missiles ( ICBMs ) currently siloed in five Great Plains states .
Russian missiles could reach them within a half hour , giving a president 10 minutes or less to decide whether to launch them before they can be destroyed by a perceived attack .
That increases the possibility of mistaken nuclear war triggered by a false attack warning .
Indeed , there have been a number of close calls over the last six decades due to human and technological errors .
While ICBMs are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ undetectable when they are at sea .
ICBMs also are superfluous .
They may have made sense 60 years ago , when they were more accurate and powerful than submarine-launched ballistic missiles and communications links with subs were unreliable .
But , today , sub-launched missiles are as accurate as ICBMs—if not more so—and the Navy has secure submarine communication links , making the ICBMs unnecessary .
The other two legs of the nuclear triad—subs and bombers—are more than adequate to deter a nuclear attack or , in the unlikely event of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , both the House and Senate bills include $ 1.5 billion for research and development ( R & D ) of the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent—the new missiles intended to replace the current fleet of Minuteman III ICBMs at an estimated cost of $ 100 billion .
According to the Air Force itself , however , there is no reason to buy new missiles .
Between 2002 and 2012 , it spent some $ 7 billion to upgrade the ICBMs to the point where an Air Force ICBM program analyst confirmed that they were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shell.
” Five years later , commenting on a successful ICBM missile flight test , the Air Force Global Strike Command Public Affairs Office boasted : “ Through continuous upgrades , including new production versions , improved targeting systems , and enhanced accuracy , today ’ s Minuteman system remains state of the art and is capable of meeting all modern challenges.
” Nothing has changed since then .
On August 4 , the Air Force conducted yet another successful ICBM flight test and proclaimed that it “ demonstrates that the United States @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , reliable and effective to deter twenty-first century threats and reassure our allies.
” That $ 100 billion for 600 new—and unnecessary—ICBMs is only one item on the Pentagon ’ s nuclear procurement list .
The United States plans to spend more than $ 1.5 trillion over the next 30 years to completely replace the entire nuclear triad with new weapons and delivery systems .
Other items on the list include 12 new nuclear ballistic missile submarines at $ 109.8 billion ; new , nuclear-armed submarine-launched ballistic missiles at $ 16–18 billion ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at $ 55 billion .
Given that the Pentagon and NNSA have routinely upgraded ICBMs , bombers and other key elements of the triad through what they call “ service-life extension programs , ” there is no pressing need to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on new versions of weapons that even former Secretary of State and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Colin Powell says are “ useless ” and “ must never be used.
” Congress may have rubber-stamped the Trump administration ’ s military budget , but there were some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shift .
In May , 27 House members sent a letter to their Armed Services Committee urging it to reduce military spending to free up funding to combat what they called our “ greatest adversary ” —the pandemic .
In mid-July , the Congressional Progressive Caucus called for an amendment to trim the proposed military budget by 10 percent— $ 74 billion—and repurpose that money to fund healthcare , housing and education initiatives in marginalized communities .
The amendment lost , but received 93 yea votes in the House and 24 in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been implausible not that long ago .
Among the elected officials supporting the cuts was California Representative Ro Khanna .
“ Lawmakers must view issues like climate change , biosecurity , cybersecurity and this pandemic as serious and real national security threats facing our nation , ” Khanna told The Hill , a political trade publication , in May .
“ For too long , we were myopically focused and spending trillions on traditional national security issues like terrorism and ‘ great power ’ politics .
These new threats impact our health , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to address them.
” Khanna also proposed an amendment to the NDAA that would have transferred $ 1 billion from R & D on a new generation of ICBMs to pandemic preparedness efforts , but the House Armed Services Committee quashed it by a 44 to 12 vote .
Given the economic belt-tightening on the horizon , Khanna ’ s perspective may presage a growing movement in Congress to curb runaway military spending in the years to come .
Cutting annual U.S. military outlays by 10 percent would be a good start , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surface .
Last year , Pentagon watchdog groups offered proposals for much deeper cuts that could still maintain a robust military .
For example , the Center for International Policy ’ s Sustainable Defense Task Force—a collection of former White House , congressional and Pentagon budget officials , ex-military officers , and think tank experts—published a report detailing how the Defense Department could cut $ 1.2 trillion in waste and inefficiency over the next decade .
The Project on Government Oversight ’ s Center for Defense Information posted a report recommending ways to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by $ 199 billion without compromising national security or military capabilities .
And the Poor People ’ s Campaign ’ s wide-ranging “ moral budget ” report went even further , calling for only $ 350 billion in annual military spending , essentially chopping the Pentagon budget in half .
As the United States begins the Herculean task of digging itself out from the worst economic downturn in generations , policy makers need to focus on rebuilding in smart and farsighted ways , and that means cutting unnecessary and wasteful spending whenever possible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is clear : In the unprecedented era of tight budgets that lies ahead , the time is ripe to reevaluate and rein in a level of military spending that has delivered little true security and stolen from critical domestic priorities for far too long .

The devastating impact of the coronavirus pandemic and its economic fallout provide ample reason to reconsider what truly constitutes national security.
Such a reassessment is long overdue. Despite the trillions of dollars Congress and successive administrations have lavished on the Pentagon since the turn of the century, the massive U.S. arsenal and fighting force deployed worldwide are powerless against grave, nonmilitary threats to national security—from a raging pandemic to the fact that tens of millions of Americans breathe foul air, drink tainted water, and struggle to pay for food, housing and health care.
When it comes to U.S. spending priorities, the numbers seem especially misguided in an era of tight budgets to come. By the Department of Defense’s own accounting, taxpayers spent $13.34 trillion on the U.S. military from 2000 through fiscal year 2019 in inflation-adjusted 2020 dollars. Add to that another $3.18 trillion for the Veterans Administration, and the yearly average comes to a whopping $826 billion.
No other country’s military outlays come close. In FY 2019, the Pentagon’s budget was nearly three times bigger than China’s defense spending and more than 10 times larger than Russia’s. All told, the U.S. military budget in 2019 exceeded the next 10 countries’ defense budgets combined and singlehandedly accounted for a hefty 38 percent of military spending worldwide.
While the Pentagon budget routinely eats up more than half of annual U.S. discretionary spending, a host of other interrelated threats that undermine national security writ large go chronically underfunded, including the current public health, environmental and climate crises, all of which disproportionately harm low-income communities and communities of color.
Certainly, these crises predate the Trump administration. But in its zeal to dismantle government regulations and slash critical programs, it has greatly exacerbated them. At the same time, its fiscal year (FY) 2021 budget calls for spending $740.5 billion on the Pentagon, $100 billion more than when President Trump took office and the most since World War II. In late July, both houses of Congress approved that request.
THE PENTAGON WASTES YOUR MONEY
There are plenty of reasons to cut the Pentagon’s budget, but its track record of profligate spending is among the most obvious. If the Pentagon were a private corporation, gross mismanagement would have forced it into bankruptcy years ago. Dysfunctional internal controls, aided and abetted by years of lax congressional and administration oversight, have enabled it to waste tens of billions of dollars annually, and the last 20 years are littered with a parade of overpriced, botched and bungled projects.
In just the first decade of this century, the Pentagon was forced to cancel a dozen ill-conceived, ineffective weapons programs that cost taxpayers $46 billion. They included the Future Combat Systems program, a fleet of networked high-tech vehicles that did not work; the Comanche helicopter, which—after 22 years in development—was never built; and the 40-ton Crusader artillery gun, which never even made it to the prototype stage.
To put this example of managerial malfeasance in context, these canceled programs collectively cost more than the federal government spent on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over the last five years.
At least the Pentagon killed those projects before they wasted any more money. All too often, it does not know when to pull the plug. The Army’s attempt to replace its outmoded Bradley tank is a case in point. Over the last 17 years, it has blown an estimated $22.9 billion on three flawed prototypes, but in February—just three weeks after rejecting the third failed design—it issued yet another request for proposals from defense contractors.
Then there are programs the Pentagon continues to green-light with zero assurance they will ever perform as advertised. Exhibit A: The Pentagon has wasted more than $67 billion since the late 1990s on a ballistic missile defense system that has never been demonstrated to work in a real-world situation. A spawn of Ronald Reagan’s Star Wars fantasy, the system—based in Alaska and California—will never be able to defend the continental United States from a limited nuclear attack. Any country capable of launching a ballistic missile could easily foil the system with decoys and other countermeasures.
Another prime example is the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. Expected to cost $1.5 trillion over its lifespan, it has the dubious distinction of being the Department of Defense’s most expensive weapons program of all time. The 490 F-35s built since the first prototype flew 20 years ago continue to be plagued by a dozen serious flaws and nearly 900 software defects, and roughly half of the fleet in 2017 and 2018 was grounded for maintenance. Regardless, the Pentagon still plans to buy 2,400 more F-35s over the next 25 years.
The F-35 is just one of the malfunctioning weapons systems on the Pentagon’s current $1.8-trillion shopping list of overpriced aircraft, missiles, ships, satellites and tanks. Other poor performers include the $22-billion Zumwalt destroyer, a warship without a mission; the $30-billion littoral combat ship, which the Navy is already mothballing because it is virtually unusable; and the Air Force’s problem-plagued $43-billion KC-46 refueling tanker, which offers little improvement over current refuelers.
But it is not only exorbitant hardware that picks taxpayer pockets. Pentagon administrative costs are also out of control. A January 2015 report by a federal advisory panel found that the Pentagon could save $125 billion in administrative waste by streamlining its bloated bureaucracy. That sum alone is 15 times more than the $8.3 billion the Trump administration proposes to spend in the next fiscal year to fund the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention during one of the worst pandemics in modern history.
THE PENTAGON OFFERS LITTLE DEFENSE AGAINST HEALTH THREATS
Speaking of the pandemic, while the Pentagon’s budget is bursting with overpriced, ineffective weapons systems and programs, U.S. health care providers were caught without an adequate supply of ventilators, respirators, masks and other protective equipment to respond to COVID-19. With 190,000 deaths (and counting) in the U.S.—more than 20 percent of the reported world total—there is no question the extent to which the coronavirus presents an incalculable threat to national security.
Notwithstanding efforts by the Defense Intelligence Agency’s National Center for Medical Intelligence, which warned the White House in late February that the coronavirus would likely become a global pandemic, and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, which is researching vaccines and funding clinical trials, the military was unable to prevent the pandemic and—aside from treating veterans with COVID-19—has been of little use to the civilian health care system in combating it.
Granted, the military dispatched 740 military doctors, nurses and support staff to hospitals in Texas and California to help with coronavirus patients, and earlier this year, the Navy sent hospital ships to New York City and Los Angeles. However, during the month the 1,000-bed, 1,200-person crew USNS Comfort was docked in midtown Manhattan, it treated only 182 patients, 70 percent of whom had COVID-19, before returning to its Norfolk, Virginia, home port. Meanwhile, the 1,000-bed, 900-person crew Navy hospital ship USNS Mercy visited Los Angeles in late March, but by mid-April, the ship had treated just a few dozen patients while more than half dozen crew members tested positive for COVID-19. All told, Mercy doctors took care of only 77 patients, and, after a seven-and-a-half-week stay, the ship returned to its home port in San Diego.
These vignettes are just small pieces of a bigger story. More significant, the hundreds of billions of dollars the federal government spends on the military every year siphons away money that could be spent to address serious flaws in the U.S. health care system.
Somehow, the U.S. manages to spend more on its military than the next 10 countries combined, but it is the only member of the 36-nation Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) that does not provide universal health care coverage. The result represents an undeniable threat to public health. In the United States, more than 27 million people lacked health insurance before the pandemic, and nearly the same number lost their job-based health insurance between February and mid-May because of layoffs.
Prepandemic U.S. health care statistics are sobering enough. The United States has been spending an estimated $3.6 trillion annually on health care—nearly twice as much as the average OECD country as a share of its economy—but less than 3 percent of that spending goes to public health and prevention. The result? The U.S. has a lower life expectancy and a higher suicide rate than 10 other wealthy countries, including Australia, Canada, France, Germany and the United Kingdom. Americans also have the highest rates of diabetes, hypertension and heart and lung disease, and an obesity rate that is double the OECD average—the very underlying medical conditions that increase vulnerability to COVID-19—and the numbers are proportionately higher for U.S. Black and Latinx populations.
Regardless, the Trump administration FY 2021 budget would slash funding for leading public health agencies by hundreds of millions of dollars. The National Institutes of Health stands to lose $3 billion, for instance, and the administration budget also calls for cutting $500 billion from Medicare and $1 trillion from Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act over the next decade.
THE PENTAGON WORSENS ENVIRONMENTAL THREATS
Environmental hazards pose an undeniable threat to national security that we largely know how to combat. Thanks to the landmark environmental laws administered by the EPA and other agencies, the nation’s air and water is considerably cleaner than in the 1960s, when rivers caught fire and cities were choked with smog. Even so, U.S. environmental standards need to be strengthened.
Today, at least 150 million people live in U.S. counties with unhealthy ozone or particle pollution and nearly 200,000 people die every year from heart, lung and other diseases caused by microscopic air pollutant levels below EPA standards. This microscopic particulate matter, measuring 2.5 microns or smaller (PM2.5), inordinately harms low-income communities and communities of color.
After a steady seven-year decline, fine particle pollution increased 5.5 percent on average between 2016 and 2018 nationwide, leading to nearly 10,000 additional premature deaths. Researchers have identified a number of culprits, including increased driving, greater use of natural gas to produce electricity, and the Trump EPA’s lax enforcement of environmental laws. Compounding the problem, the EPA refused to strengthen its inadequate PM2.5 standards in April, just a week after a study found that COVID-19 causes a significantly higher death toll in areas with only slightly higher PM2.5 levels.
While most U.S. residents have access to safe drinking water, Flint, Michigan’s lead problem is hardly an isolated case. Dangerous contaminants—including arsenic, copper and lead—can still be found in tap water nationwide. Community water systems serving nearly 30 million people, for example, violated the EPA lead and copper rule between January 2015 and March 2018. Another 16 million people across 35 states drink water contaminated by perchlorate, a rocket fuel component used on U.S. military bases that can cause neurological damage in infants and young children. Regardless, in June, the Trump EPA defied a court order and finalized its decision to forego a standard limiting perchlorate’s concentration in drinking water.
The hundreds of billions the U.S. spends on the military annually do nothing to address these and other environmental threats. What’s worse, the Defense Department is one of the world’s worst polluters. Besides its perchlorate problem, its more than 4,000 installations across the country are home to 39,000 contaminated sites, 141 of which are listed among the EPA Superfund sites that are among the most polluted in the nation. Likewise, the U.S. military’s nearly 800 installations overseas, which range from small radar stations to major airbases in more than 70 countries, have many of the same environmental problems as its domestic sites.
Compared to the Pentagon, the federal agencies charged with safeguarding the environment are barely scraping by. In FY 2020, for example, the EPA’s budget was a measly $9 billion, practically a rounding error on the Pentagon’s ledger. The agency’s budget has already shrunk by a quarter in inflation-adjusted dollars since 2010, and now the Trump administration is proposing to cut the agency’s current budget by another 26 percent, eliminating 50 agency programs, including ones that address air and water pollution.
THE PENTAGON EXACERBATES CLIMATE CHANGE
Any assessment of threats to national security must include the danger posed by human-caused climate change. Marked by heat waves, droughts, wildfires, extreme precipitation, flooding and other severe weather events, global warming intensifies the health and environmental crises described above.
For example, the higher temperatures and increased rainfall brought on by climate change amplify the threat of infectious diseases such as Zika and Ebola, allowing parasites, viruses and bacteria transmitted by mosquitoes, ticks, flies and fleas to spread diseases to areas that did not experience them before.
Like infectious diseases, heat waves can kill. From 2004 through 2018, an average of 702 U.S. residents died from extreme heat every year. Meanwhile, the number of annual heat waves in 50 U.S. cities has tripled on average since 1960, and in August, the Western half of the country baked. More than 140 weather stations recorded record highs, California’s Death Valley hit 130 degrees Fahrenheit, and the National Weather Service issued an excessive heat advisory for 80 million people. September has been just as bad, at least for Californians. Los Angeles County set a record temperature of 121 degrees F on Labor Day weekend, while the mercury in San Francisco hit 100 degrees F.
Scientists predict it will only get worse unless we take dramatic steps to slash carbon emissions. The 2018 National Climate Assessment, a collaboration of 14 federal agencies, forecast that heat stroke and similar heat-related illnesses will kill tens of thousands across the country every year by the end of the century.
Wildfires, drought and hurricanes—intensified by climate change—are also wreaking havoc. This year alone, more than 7,000 wildfires, fueled by record heat and drought, have burned in California, destroying some 2.5 million acres. Besides California, Arizona, Colorado, Iowa and parts of Connecticut, Nevada and New Hampshire have faced severe drought conditions. And in the Atlantic Ocean, a marine heat wave is triggering an an unusually active hurricane season.
To its credit, the Pentagon—unlike President Trump and 150 members of Congress—officially recognizes the climate threat. A January 2019 Pentagon report on the subject, for instance, found that 46 of the U.S. military’s 79 high-priority installations are vulnerable to climate change–related flooding, drought, desertification, wildfires and thawing permafrost.
Unfortunately for the planet, however, global warming is not an enemy the Pentagon is prepared to fight. According to a June 2019 report by the Government Accountability Office, an independent congressional watchdog, military facilities are not moving quickly enough to address climate threats, and the Pentagon is not providing enough guidance on how to use climate change projections to protect bases or the personnel on them.
Worse yet, the Pentagon is also is a major part of the problem. Although it significantly reduced its fossil fuel consumption over the last two decades, the U.S. military is still the world’s top petroleum consumer and largest carbon polluter. Between 2001 and 2017, the five military branches collectively emitted 1.2 billion metric tons of carbon emissions, twice the annual output of all the passenger vehicles nationwide.
Left unchecked, the costs of the climate crisis will be astronomical. Extreme weather events and other climate change–related impacts are already costing billions of dollars a year in property damage. From 2017 through 2019, there were 44 unique extreme weather and climate events across the country with damages of $1 billion or more, amounting to a total of more than $460 billion.
Despite the undeniable risks, the Trump administration has targeted the Obama administration’s signature climate change efforts, seeking to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement, replacing the Clean Power Plan, which would have dramatically curbed power plant carbon pollution, and attempting to roll back the Obama administration’s groundbreaking vehicle fuel economy standards, which already have significantly cut carbon emissions from cars and trucks.
The cost of meeting the Paris climate agreement’s goal of keeping global temperatures from rising more than 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees F) is estimated to run $1.6 trillion to $3.8 trillion a year. Imagine the boon to national—and international—security if the United States invested the $1.8 trillion the Pentagon plans to spend on new weapons systems in clean energy, advanced batteries and related technology to curb the carbon emissions that drive climate change.
FIRST STEP: CUT NUCLEAR SPENDING
In late July, both the U.S. House and Senate failed to keep military spending in check. Their respective versions of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) received quite a bit of media attention for defying President Trump by calling for removing Confederate names from military bases, but in the end, both chambers signed off on the administration’s bloated top-line budget request.
Perhaps the least deserving of these expenditures is the $44.5 billion budget for nuclear weapons programs at the Department of Defense and at the Energy Department’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)—a 19-percent increase over last year’s allocation. If there is any place to start cutting the military budget, it is the nuclear arsenal.
The United States far outspends every other member of the nuclear club. The U.S. FY 2019 outlay of $35.4 billion, for instance, accounted for nearly half of the $72.9 billion the nine nuclear-armed countries collectively spent on nuclear weapons that year, three times the $10.4 billion China spent and four times the $8.5 billion Russia spent. U.S. allies France, India, Israel, Pakistan and the United Kingdom, meanwhile, combined to spend $18 billion, roughly half of the U.S. nuclear weapons budget.
There is no legitimate security justification for maintaining the outsized U.S. arsenal. A single U.S. nuclear-armed submarine, for instance, is capable of carrying warheads that are collectively nearly 10 times more powerful than all the bombs dropped during World War II, including the two atomic bombs. One full salvo from a single sub could wipe out two dozen cities—and the Navy has a fleet of 12 at sea.
Top Pentagon officials concede that the U.S. nuclear arsenal could be trimmed considerably without jeopardizing security, according to Fred Kaplan, a longtime military affairs reporter and author of The Bomb: Presidents, Generals, and the Secret History of Nuclear War. “During the Obama administration,” Kaplan wrote in a May column, “after a deep analysis of the nuclear war plan and its requirements, senior officials, including the four-star head of Strategic Command, agreed that the nuclear arsenal could be cut by one-third without any damage to U.S. security.”
The first to go should be the 400 U.S. intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) currently siloed in five Great Plains states. Russian missiles could reach them within a half hour, giving a president 10 minutes or less to decide whether to launch them before they can be destroyed by a perceived attack. That increases the possibility of mistaken nuclear war triggered by a false attack warning. Indeed, there have been a number of close calls over the last six decades due to human and technological errors.
While ICBMs are sitting ducks, nuclear-armed submarines are virtually undetectable when they are at sea. ICBMs also are superfluous. They may have made sense 60 years ago, when they were more accurate and powerful than submarine-launched ballistic missiles and communications links with subs were unreliable. But, today, sub-launched missiles are as accurate as ICBMs—if not more so—and the Navy has secure submarine communication links, making the ICBMs unnecessary. The other two legs of the nuclear triad—subs and bombers—are more than adequate to deter a nuclear attack or, in the unlikely event of a nuclear attack, to retaliate.
Nevertheless, both the House and Senate bills include $1.5 billion for research and development (R&D) of the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent—the new missiles intended to replace the current fleet of Minuteman III ICBMs at an estimated cost of $100 billion.
According to the Air Force itself, however, there is no reason to buy new missiles. Between 2002 and 2012, it spent some $7 billion to upgrade the ICBMs to the point where an Air Force ICBM program analyst confirmed that they were “basically new missiles except for the shell.” Five years later, commenting on a successful ICBM missile flight test, the Air Force Global Strike Command Public Affairs Office boasted: “Through continuous upgrades, including new production versions, improved targeting systems, and enhanced accuracy, today’s Minuteman system remains state of the art and is capable of meeting all modern challenges.” Nothing has changed since then. On August 4, the Air Force conducted yet another successful ICBM flight test and proclaimed that it “demonstrates that the United States’ nuclear deterrent is safe, secure, reliable and effective to deter twenty-first century threats and reassure our allies.”
That $100 billion for 600 new—and unnecessary—ICBMs is only one item on the Pentagon’s nuclear procurement list. The United States plans to spend more than $1.5 trillion over the next 30 years to completely replace the entire nuclear triad with new weapons and delivery systems. Other items on the list include 12 new nuclear ballistic missile submarines at $109.8 billion; new, nuclear-armed submarine-launched ballistic missiles at $16–18 billion; and 100 B-21 Raider stealth long-range bombers at $55 billion.
Given that the Pentagon and NNSA have routinely upgraded ICBMs, bombers and other key elements of the triad through what they call “service-life extension programs,” there is no pressing need to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on new versions of weapons that even former Secretary of State and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Colin Powell says are “useless” and “must never be used.”
A MOVEMENT TO REIN IN SPENDING?
Congress may have rubber-stamped the Trump administration’s military budget, but there were some glimmers that priorities may be starting to shift. In May, 27 House members sent a letter to their Armed Services Committee urging it to reduce military spending to free up funding to combat what they called our “greatest adversary”—the pandemic. In mid-July, the Congressional Progressive Caucus called for an amendment to trim the proposed military budget by 10 percent—$74 billion—and repurpose that money to fund healthcare, housing and education initiatives in marginalized communities. The amendment lost, but received 93 yea votes in the House and 24 in the Senate—a level of support that would have been implausible not that long ago.
Among the elected officials supporting the cuts was California Representative Ro Khanna. “Lawmakers must view issues like climate change, biosecurity, cybersecurity and this pandemic as serious and real national security threats facing our nation,” Khanna told The Hill, a political trade publication, in May. “For too long, we were myopically focused and spending trillions on traditional national security issues like terrorism and ‘great power’ politics. These new threats impact our health, safety and economy, requiring new funds to address them.”
Khanna also proposed an amendment to the NDAA that would have transferred $1 billion from R&D on a new generation of ICBMs to pandemic preparedness efforts, but the House Armed Services Committee quashed it by a 44 to 12 vote.
Given the economic belt-tightening on the horizon, Khanna’s perspective may presage a growing movement in Congress to curb runaway military spending in the years to come. Cutting annual U.S. military outlays by 10 percent would be a good start, but even that would barely scratch the surface. Last year, Pentagon watchdog groups offered proposals for much deeper cuts that could still maintain a robust military. For example, the Center for International Policy’s Sustainable Defense Task Force—a collection of former White House, congressional and Pentagon budget officials, ex-military officers, and think tank experts—published a report detailing how the Defense Department could cut $1.2 trillion in waste and inefficiency over the next decade. The Project on Government Oversight’s Center for Defense Information posted a report recommending ways to cut the Pentagon’s annual budget by $199 billion without compromising national security or military capabilities. And the Poor People’s Campaign’s wide-ranging “moral budget” report went even further, calling for only $350 billion in annual military spending, essentially chopping the Pentagon budget in half.
As the United States begins the Herculean task of digging itself out from the worst economic downturn in generations, policy makers need to focus on rebuilding in smart and farsighted ways, and that means cutting unnecessary and wasteful spending whenever possible. As they do, one thing is clear: In the unprecedented era of tight budgets that lies ahead, the time is ripe to reevaluate and rein in a level of military spending that has delivered little true security and stolen from critical domestic priorities for far too long.


scientificamerican--2020-09-14--Polar Bears' Dropped GPS Collars Reveal How Ice Drifts

Just because a scientist puts a GPS tracking collar on a wild polar bear does not mean the animal will obligingly keep it on .
In fact , these humongous neckbands are purposefully girthy so that if one becomes irritating , a bear can remove it .
But scientists have now found a way to use signals from the discarded devices .
“ These dropped collars potentially would have been considered garbage data , ” says Natasha Klappstein , a polar bear researcher at the University of Alberta .
She and her collaborators ( including researchers at the University of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Canada ) instead used measurements from such collars , left on sea ice in Canada 's Hudson Bay , to track the ice itself .
For their study , published in June in The Cryosphere , the researchers identified 20 collars that transmitted movement data consistent with ice drift rather than polar bear motion between 2005 and 2015 .
The resulting records of how melting ice typically drifts in Hudson Bay are unique ; there are no easily accessible on-the-ground sensors , and satellite observations often can not accurately capture the motion of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the discarded collars ' movements to widely used ice-drift modeling data from the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center ( NSIDC ) .
Collar data indicated that the NSIDC model underestimates the speed at which ice moves around in Hudson Bay—as well as the overall extent of drift .
Over the course of several months the model could diverge from an ice sheet 's location by a few hundred kilometers , the researchers say .
This means the bears may be working harder , when moving against the direction of the ice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Since we 're underestimating the speed of drift , we 're likely underestimating the energetic [ effort ] of polar bears , ” says University of British Columbia 's Ron Togunov , lead author of the study .
The research reveals timely insight into how highly mobile ice moves .
As melting increases in coming years , such ice will likely become more common farther north , in the central Arctic , says Andy Mahoney , a geophysicist at the University of Alaska , Fairbanks , who was not involved in the study @ @ @ @ @ @ @ underestimate drift speeds , Mahoney says , but “ any time we can find a data gap and plug it is a good thing.
” Plus , such data could improve predictions about how oil spills or other pollutants may spread in seas littered with drifting ice , says Walt Meier , a senior NSIDC research scientist , who was also not involved in the study .
The findings may even influence future NSIDC models : “ It 's a really nice data set , ” Meier says .
“ And certainly one @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Just because a scientist puts a GPS tracking collar on a wild polar bear does not mean the animal will obligingly keep it on. In fact, these humongous neckbands are purposefully girthy so that if one becomes irritating, a bear can remove it. But scientists have now found a way to use signals from the discarded devices.
“These dropped collars potentially would have been considered garbage data,” says Natasha Klappstein, a polar bear researcher at the University of Alberta. She and her collaborators (including researchers at the University of British Columbia and Environment and Climate Change Canada) instead used measurements from such collars, left on sea ice in Canada's Hudson Bay, to track the ice itself.
For their study, published in June in The Cryosphere, the researchers identified 20 collars that transmitted movement data consistent with ice drift rather than polar bear motion between 2005 and 2015. The resulting records of how melting ice typically drifts in Hudson Bay are unique; there are no easily accessible on-the-ground sensors, and satellite observations often cannot accurately capture the motion of small ice sheets.
The team compared the discarded collars' movements to widely used ice-drift modeling data from the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC). Collar data indicated that the NSIDC model underestimates the speed at which ice moves around in Hudson Bay—as well as the overall extent of drift. Over the course of several months the model could diverge from an ice sheet's location by a few hundred kilometers, the researchers say.
This means the bears may be working harder, when moving against the direction of the ice, than scientists had assumed: “Since we're underestimating the speed of drift, we're likely underestimating the energetic [effort] of polar bears,” says University of British Columbia's Ron Togunov, lead author of the study.
The research reveals timely insight into how highly mobile ice moves. As melting increases in coming years, such ice will likely become more common farther north, in the central Arctic, says Andy Mahoney, a geophysicist at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, who was not involved in the study. Scientists had known NSIDC data could underestimate drift speeds, Mahoney says, but “any time we can find a data gap and plug it is a good thing.”
Plus, such data could improve predictions about how oil spills or other pollutants may spread in seas littered with drifting ice, says Walt Meier, a senior NSIDC research scientist, who was also not involved in the study. The findings may even influence future NSIDC models: “It's a really nice data set,” Meier says. “And certainly one we'll take under consideration.”


The Hawking Limit

Early in life , I was especially sensitive to the conditions around me .
Minor levels of background noise would spoil my concentration .
But as I matured , I developed the skill of ignoring distractions and focusing only on substance .
During a routine morning jog through the woods near my home last month , I fell down , bumping my forehead on a rock and fracturing my wrist .
My consequent visit to Mass General hospital resulted in two stitches on my forehead and a cast over my arm .
It could have been worse .
There was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as it shaved off a mole that I always wanted to remove from my face .
I was fortunate to return home for dinner just before midnight .
At 5 A.M. the following day , I went back to my routine jog with bandages covering my entire face and the cast around my left arm .
Except for birds , rabbits and ducks , nobody was out so early after sunrise to notice my appearance .
The circumstances did not feel strange .
I ignored the materials wrapped around my body as if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and focused entirely on the run .
In online meetings throughout the day , my postdocs and students were stunned to find out that I had carried on with my jog instead of taking some rest .
I reasoned that the fun in life is all about the struggle with challenges and the effort to accomplish tasks despite obstacles .
Achieving goals against all odds makes life worth living and celebrates the resilience of the human spirit .
The most inspiring example is Stephen Hawking , who despite being paralyzed by a motor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ became one of the leading physicists of his generation .
For half a century , he was attached to a wheelchair .
After losing the ability to speak , he communicated through a speech generating device , initially activated by a hand switch and eventually—when he could not move his fingers—by a single cheek muscle , facial expressions and eyebrow movements .
In 2006 Hawking stated that his greatest unfulfilled desire was to travel to space .
The following year , he flew aboard a reduced-gravity aircraft ( affectionately known as the “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coast to experience weightlessness .
A decade later , he traveled to New York City for the public announcement of Breakthrough Starshot , the first funded initiative for interstellar travel .
This was followed by a visit to Harvard University for the inauguration of the Black Hole Initiative .
Despite being 74 years old on this trip , Hawking hopped from one public event to another , including a Passover dinner at my home .
His caretakers noted that after one of the evening events , he told them : “ I am @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the hotel bar and have some fun.
” Hawking ’ s life demonstrates that human identity is separate from the physical circumstances wrapped around it , natural or custom-made .
Many other examples lie in between my mild injury and the Hawking limit , defined as the extreme condition when most of the human body loses functionality .
What establishes the human identity , then ?
It is certainly not a fully functioning body , although it definitely requires a functioning human brain .
As René Descartes noted : “ I think , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sum ) .
” Since thoughts establish a sense of identity , groups of people could share the same identity .
In the futuristic era of genetic engineering , one could imagine artificially duplicating a genetic code to a large number of copies , as an extension of the natural birth of identical twins or higher multiples .
This would increase the likelihood of survival for that genome under dangerous circumstances such as those realized in space travel .
Future missions to Mars or more distant destinations could be crewed by duplicates of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so that if some are lost , other copies might survive .
The approach would echo the effect of Gutenberg ’ s printing press , which , in producing identical copies of the Bible , made each of them less unique or precious .
Hawking ’ s funeral service on March 31 , 2016 , took place at the Church of Great St. Mary in Cambridge University and ended with the choir of Gonville and Caius College singing Frank Sinatra ’ s song “ Fly Me To The Moon , ” which continues @ @ @ @ @ @ @ among the stars.
” After his remains were laid to rest at London ’ s Westminster Abbey , a six minute broadcast , drawn from a speech in his synthesized voice , was beamed towards the nearest known black hole A0620-00 from a radio antenna in Spain .
Hawking ’ s resilience could serve as an inspiration for our future in space .
Advanced space missions might carry copies of entities at the Hawking limit , possessing a common collective identity separately from the physical equipment that serves them .
Without bumping my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ compromising some of its functionality , I would have never recognized this fascinating possibility .

Early in life, I was especially sensitive to the conditions around me. Minor levels of background noise would spoil my concentration. But as I matured, I developed the skill of ignoring distractions and focusing only on substance.
During a routine morning jog through the woods near my home last month, I fell down, bumping my forehead on a rock and fracturing my wrist. My consequent visit to Mass General hospital resulted in two stitches on my forehead and a cast over my arm. It could have been worse. There was even an added benefit to the fall as it shaved off a mole that I always wanted to remove from my face. I was fortunate to return home for dinner just before midnight. At 5 A.M. the following day, I went back to my routine jog with bandages covering my entire face and the cast around my left arm. Except for birds, rabbits and ducks, nobody was out so early after sunrise to notice my appearance. The circumstances did not feel strange. I ignored the materials wrapped around my body as if they were pieces of new clothing, and focused entirely on the run.
In online meetings throughout the day, my postdocs and students were stunned to find out that I had carried on with my jog instead of taking some rest. I reasoned that the fun in life is all about the struggle with challenges and the effort to accomplish tasks despite obstacles.
Achieving goals against all odds makes life worth living and celebrates the resilience of the human spirit. The most inspiring example is Stephen Hawking, who despite being paralyzed by a motor neuron disease and unable to speak, became one of the leading physicists of his generation. For half a century, he was attached to a wheelchair. After losing the ability to speak, he communicated through a speech generating device, initially activated by a hand switch and eventually—when he could not move his fingers—by a single cheek muscle, facial expressions and eyebrow movements.
In 2006 Hawking stated that his greatest unfulfilled desire was to travel to space. The following year, he flew aboard a reduced-gravity aircraft (affectionately known as the “Vomit Comet”) off the Florida coast to experience weightlessness. A decade later, he traveled to New York City for the public announcement of Breakthrough Starshot, the first funded initiative for interstellar travel. This was followed by a visit to Harvard University for the inauguration of the Black Hole Initiative. Despite being 74 years old on this trip, Hawking hopped from one public event to another, including a Passover dinner at my home. His caretakers noted that after one of the evening events, he told them: “I am bored. Let’s go to the hotel bar and have some fun.”
Hawking’s life demonstrates that human identity is separate from the physical circumstances wrapped around it, natural or custom-made. Many other examples lie in between my mild injury and the Hawking limit, defined as the extreme condition when most of the human body loses functionality. What establishes the human identity, then? It is certainly not a fully functioning body, although it definitely requires a functioning human brain. As René Descartes noted: “I think, therefore I am (Cogito, ergo sum).”
Since thoughts establish a sense of identity, groups of people could share the same identity. In the futuristic era of genetic engineering, one could imagine artificially duplicating a genetic code to a large number of copies, as an extension of the natural birth of identical twins or higher multiples. This would increase the likelihood of survival for that genome under dangerous circumstances such as those realized in space travel. Future missions to Mars or more distant destinations could be crewed by duplicates of humans sharing the same genetic material, so that if some are lost, other copies might survive. The approach would echo the effect of Gutenberg’s printing press, which, in producing identical copies of the Bible, made each of them less unique or precious.
Hawking’s funeral service on March 31, 2018, took place at the Church of Great St. Mary in Cambridge University and ended with the choir of Gonville and Caius College singing Frank Sinatra’s song “Fly Me To The Moon,” which continues with the words “let me play among the stars.” After his remains were laid to rest at London’s Westminster Abbey, a six minute broadcast, drawn from a speech in his synthesized voice, was beamed towards the nearest known black hole A0620-00 from a radio antenna in Spain.
Hawking’s resilience could serve as an inspiration for our future in space. Advanced space missions might carry copies of entities at the Hawking limit, possessing a common collective identity separately from the physical equipment that serves them. Without bumping my body against a terrestrial rock and temporarily compromising some of its functionality, I would have never recognized this fascinating possibility.


scientificamerican--2020-09-14--Mail-Sorting Machines Are Crucial for the U.S. Postal Service

This summer the American Postal Workers Union filed a grievance against the U.S .
Postal Service over the agency ’ s plans to decommission 671 mail-sorting machines at facilities across the country .
Although a few such machines are normally replaced each year because of wear and tear , this mass removal would involve a significant percentage of the more than 8,500 pieces of automated processing equipment that the USPS uses nationwide .
The move also coincided with new USPS cost-cutting measures—instituted by Louis DeJoy , a former Republican Party fundraiser whom President Donald Trump appointed postmaster general earlier this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and delayed deliveries .
The situation , coming just ahead of a general election in which coronavirus precautions will lead many Americans to vote by mail , could potentially affect the outcome : the USPS has announced that it may not be able to deliver mail-in ballots to voters on time if they are requested later than 15 days before the election .
Automated machines such as the ones being decommissioned greatly speed up the mail-sorting process for the USPS , which delivers what amounts to roughly half the world ’ s mail @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up to tens of thousands of pieces of mail per hour , performing what is “ essentially a mechanized and automated version of the same process that was done in the 19th century , ” says Daniel Piazza , chief curator of the Smithsonian Institution ’ s National Postal Museum in Washington , D.C. Of course , this process goes much faster than it did when a sorter was “ a person standing in front of an enormous wall of cubbyholes , reading the address and putting it in the right box for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Scientific American spoke with Piazza about how mail-sorting machines work and why they are so crucial to today ’ s postal service .
[ An edited transcript of the interview follows . ]
What are the automated processes that a letter goes through in today ’ s mail system ?
The first stage is something that ’ s called acceptance—the process of the postal service taking possession of your mail and bringing it into the system .
You can drop a letter in a corner mailbox , bring it to the counter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clerk or leave it in your own mailbox for the carrier .
Or a big mailing firm might pull a tractor trailer up to a big sorting and bulk-distribution center .
The next step , generally , is that [ the mail will ] go through “ facer-canceler machines , ” which bring in the letter , orient it the right way and check for postage .
The cameras on the machine can read tagging ( phosphorescent or ultraviolet ink that ’ s incorporated into U.S. postage stamps ) under UV light and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your letter .
And then it cancels the [ stamp ] and applies the postmark .
Cancellation is what obliterates the postage stamp so it can ’ t be used again ; [ it ’ s replaced with a ] postmark that has information such as the place and date of mailing .
If there ’ s no postage on the letter , then it ’ ll be kicked out of the machine for a human to actually review .
But those cases are pretty rare .
Once the mail has been canceled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the machine .
The optical character reader will read the address and spray a bar code on the front of the of the mail piece that indicates [ where it should go ] .
Most people don ’ t realize that their actual zip code is , I think , up to 17 or 19 digits now .
There ’ s the five- or maybe nine-digit zip code that you include on the envelope , but that bar code that ’ s sprayed on the envelope contains within it about 17 or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to your block and sometimes to your house .
All that can be placed on planes or trucks and sent out of the sorting-and-distribution center to the local post office for delivery .
When the letter arrives at the local distribution-and-processing center , it gets put into machines that sort mail now—not by city or by zip code but by actual carrier route within the city .
In many cases , it ’ s prearranged in what ’ s known as walk order , the order in which the carrier is going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a whole other process : carriers used to have to get to the post office , I ’ d say at five or six o ’ clock in the morning , and do all of that sorting of the mail for their route before they went to deliver mail .
Now [ when they ] arrive in the morning , the mail is already delivered from the distribution center to the local post office , sorted in that walk order .
When did the postal service start relying on these machines ?
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be automated was the canceling of postage stamps , which had been done by hand almost exclusively up until around the turn of the 20th century .
But that still required a person to handle every piece of mail : orient it the right way to go through the canceling machines , make sure that the stamp is in the upper right-hand corner , and so forth .
It remained almost totally manual until the late 1950s—in a sense , we figured out how to sort the mail and put a man in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Transorma machine that ’ s introduced in 1957 and the multiposition letter-sorting machines that are introduced a little after that , they still relied on the model of a human operator sitting in a chair .
These were essentially conveyor belts or other mechanisms that would put a piece of mail in front of that operator .
The operator would read the address and , through some keystrokes , would code that mail to its destination .
And then the machine would take that mail and deposit it in the appropriate bin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ optical character recognition , [ or OCR ] , that can actually read handwritten , as well as typewritten , addresses .
Much of that technology was developed in the 1960s and the early 1970s by private industry but under contract to the postal service .
This technology is on your computer today .
When you scan in documents , letters or a book and then tell Adobe Acrobat or whatever program you ’ re using to perform OCR , that software that you ’ re using on your computer is directly related @ @ @ @ @ @ @ applications of it .
Despite how accurate the OCR is and how far it ’ s progressed in the past 50 or 60 years , there ’ s still a certain percentage of the mail that ’ s unreadable by the machines .
Maybe something is obscuring the address , or the handwriting is particularly bad .
In those cases , those letters are still read and reviewed by a human operator .
But nowadays much of that is actually done remotely , [ at ] what ’ s called a remote encoding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country is transmitting images of the mail that it can ’ t read to this handful of remote encoding centers .
And then it progresses to the situation we have today , which is : now there are enormous machines that can do all of this in one process .
They can arrange all the mail pieces in the same direction , cancel the mail , read the address and sort it to its destination .
Most of the mail that goes through the mail system is never even really seen or handled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a human employee .
When did the machines start sorting packages as well as letters ?
The mechanizing of parcels was a separate process and much more tricky , from an engineering and mechanical standpoint , because of the tremendous variety of the size and dimensions of parcels that are handled through the mail .
What ’ s happened over time is : the volume of letter mail , or first class mail , has declined tremendously .
And the volume of packaged mail has increased tremendously—particularly over the past three to five @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being indoors and ordering things that come in small parcels .

This summer the American Postal Workers Union filed a grievance against the U.S. Postal Service over the agency’s plans to decommission 671 mail-sorting machines at facilities across the country. Although a few such machines are normally replaced each year because of wear and tear, this mass removal would involve a significant percentage of the more than 8,500 pieces of automated processing equipment that the USPS uses nationwide.
The move also coincided with new USPS cost-cutting measures—instituted by Louis DeJoy, a former Republican Party fundraiser whom President Donald Trump appointed postmaster general earlier this year—which have been blamed for mail backlogs and delayed deliveries. The situation, coming just ahead of a general election in which coronavirus precautions will lead many Americans to vote by mail, could potentially affect the outcome: the USPS has announced that it may not be able to deliver mail-in ballots to voters on time if they are requested later than 15 days before the election.
Automated machines such as the ones being decommissioned greatly speed up the mail-sorting process for the USPS, which delivers what amounts to roughly half the world’s mail. Its equipment can postmark and sort up to tens of thousands of pieces of mail per hour, performing what is “essentially a mechanized and automated version of the same process that was done in the 19th century,” says Daniel Piazza, chief curator of the Smithsonian Institution’s National Postal Museum in Washington, D.C. Of course, this process goes much faster than it did when a sorter was “a person standing in front of an enormous wall of cubbyholes, reading the address and putting it in the right box for the right city,” he adds. Scientific American spoke with Piazza about how mail-sorting machines work and why they are so crucial to today’s postal service.
[An edited transcript of the interview follows.]
What are the automated processes that a letter goes through in today’s mail system?
The first stage is something that’s called acceptance—the process of the postal service taking possession of your mail and bringing it into the system. You can drop a letter in a corner mailbox, bring it to the counter [to] hand it to a clerk or leave it in your own mailbox for the carrier. Or a big mailing firm might pull a tractor trailer up to a big sorting and bulk-distribution center.
The next step, generally, is that [the mail will] go through “facer-canceler machines,” which bring in the letter, orient it the right way and check for postage. The cameras on the machine can read tagging (phosphorescent or ultraviolet ink that’s incorporated into U.S. postage stamps) under UV light and know that there’s postage on your letter. And then it cancels the [stamp] and applies the postmark. Cancellation is what obliterates the postage stamp so it can’t be used again; [it’s replaced with a] postmark that has information such as the place and date of mailing. If there’s no postage on the letter, then it’ll be kicked out of the machine for a human to actually review. But those cases are pretty rare.
Once the mail has been canceled, it goes into the sorting part of the machine. The optical character reader will read the address and spray a bar code on the front of the of the mail piece that indicates [where it should go]. Most people don’t realize that their actual zip code is, I think, up to 17 or 19 digits now. There’s the five- or maybe nine-digit zip code that you include on the envelope, but that bar code that’s sprayed on the envelope contains within it about 17 or 19 digits that code the mail—at least to your block and sometimes to your house. All that can be placed on planes or trucks and sent out of the sorting-and-distribution center to the local post office for delivery.
When the letter arrives at the local distribution-and-processing center, it gets put into machines that sort mail now—not by city or by zip code but by actual carrier route within the city. In many cases, it’s prearranged in what’s known as walk order, the order in which the carrier is going to walk the route. And that automates a whole other process: carriers used to have to get to the post office, I’d say at five or six o’clock in the morning, and do all of that sorting of the mail for their route before they went to deliver mail. Now [when they] arrive in the morning, the mail is already delivered from the distribution center to the local post office, sorted in that walk order.
When did the postal service start relying on these machines?
The first part of the mail-processing workflow to be automated was the canceling of postage stamps, which had been done by hand almost exclusively up until around the turn of the 20th century. But that still required a person to handle every piece of mail: orient it the right way to go through the canceling machines, make sure that the stamp is in the upper right-hand corner, and so forth. It remained almost totally manual until the late 1950s—in a sense, we figured out how to sort the mail and put a man in space at about the same time. The Transorma machine that’s introduced in 1957 and the multiposition letter-sorting machines that are introduced a little after that, they still relied on the model of a human operator sitting in a chair. These were essentially conveyor belts or other mechanisms that would put a piece of mail in front of that operator. The operator would read the address and, through some keystrokes, would code that mail to its destination. And then the machine would take that mail and deposit it in the appropriate bin.
Then you have the introduction of optical character recognition, [or OCR], that can actually read handwritten, as well as typewritten, addresses. Much of that technology was developed in the 1960s and the early 1970s by private industry but under contract to the postal service. This technology is on your computer today. When you scan in documents, letters or a book and then tell Adobe Acrobat or whatever program you’re using to perform OCR, that software that you’re using on your computer is directly related to these postal contracts and the postal applications of it. Despite how accurate the OCR is and how far it’s progressed in the past 50 or 60 years, there’s still a certain percentage of the mail that’s unreadable by the machines. Maybe something is obscuring the address, or the handwriting is particularly bad. In those cases, those letters are still read and reviewed by a human operator. But nowadays much of that is actually done remotely, [at] what’s called a remote encoding center. Mail-sorting equipment all over the country is transmitting images of the mail that it can’t read to this handful of remote encoding centers.
And then it progresses to the situation we have today, which is: now there are enormous machines that can do all of this in one process. They can arrange all the mail pieces in the same direction, cancel the mail, read the address and sort it to its destination. Most of the mail that goes through the mail system is never even really seen or handled, during the processing phase, by a human employee.
When did the machines start sorting packages as well as letters?
The mechanizing of parcels was a separate process and much more tricky, from an engineering and mechanical standpoint, because of the tremendous variety of the size and dimensions of parcels that are handled through the mail. What’s happened over time is: the volume of letter mail, or first class mail, has declined tremendously. And the volume of packaged mail has increased tremendously—particularly over the past three to five months, with COVID-19 and more people being indoors and ordering things that come in small parcels.