scientificamerican--2020-11-23--Harsh Droughts Can Actually Start Over Oceans

Droughts conjure images of vast expanses of hard , cracked soil and parched plants , but new research suggests that disastrous dry spells can develop over the wettest place of all : the ocean .
Low-moisture air masses sometimes form and migrate thousands of kilometers over the sea , similar to the way hurricanes behave .
These dry-air regions are less coherent , changing shape as they develop , however , and they move much slower .
Some take more than half a year before they hit land , where they can destroy crops and threaten water security .
Yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be able to predict when this newly recognized type of drought will impact key regions , such as the western U.S. “ Thinking about droughts as a dynamic hazard is a new idea , ” says environmental engineer Julio Herrera Estrada , who helped discover the phenomenon .
He and his Stanford University postdoctoral advisor Noah Diffenbaugh describe what they have dubbed “ landfalling droughts ” in a study published this fall in Water Resources Research .
Herrera Estrada and Diffenbaugh made their discovery by retroactively following areas of relatively low atmospheric moisture @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , from meteorological records between 1981 and 2018 .
“ We watched them change shape from month to month and tracked how they moved in space and time , ” says Herrera Estrada , who now focuses on sustainability as an applied scientist at Descartes Labs in Santa Fe , N.M .
The researchers found that most areas of drought began and ended entirely over either the ocean or land .
But one in six of the droughts afflicting continents turned out to have started over the ocean .
“ It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ head around .
It ’ s a little counterintuitive to think about droughts over the ocean , because it ’ s wet , ” Herrera Estrada says .
“ But there can still be lower rainfall over the ocean.
” Drought has affected more of the world ’ s population than tsunamis , earthquakes or any other natural hazard in the past 40 years , killing and displacing people by the millions , according to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization .
And landfalling droughts are particularly extreme , compared with conventional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can be one third drier and can grow nearly four times as fast and more than five times larger .
The researchers did not investigate why they are more severe , but “ one idea is that the atmospheric patterns responsible for landfalling droughts may themselves be different , ” Herrera Estrada says .
For example , the patterns that create and propel landfalling droughts may be larger than the patterns that drive those that form , and remain , over land .
The hotspots for landfalling droughts seem to include western North @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Africa and eastern Asia .
The researchers are not yet sure why and say the factors that form and influence landfalling droughts may vary in different parts of the world .
In western North America , for example , they found that these droughts are linked to areas of high pressure that block rainstorms and thus might initiate dry spells .
Herrera Estrada speculates that as high-pressure areas shift , landfalling droughts may develop along their path .
Once these droughts make landfall , high-pressure zones could then lock them in place .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ called the “ ridiculously resilient ridge ” was stubbornly parked off the U.S. West Coast during much of California ’ s 2011–2017 drought—among its worst in recorded history .
Herrera Estrada and Diffenbaugh hope monitoring landfalling droughts will bolster prediction and preparation in California and other hotspots .
“ Seasonal forecasting is really hard , ” says Julie Kalansky , a climate expert at the federally funded California-Nevada Climate Applications Program , who was not involved in the new research .
She welcomes novel approaches to this problem and thinks tracking low-moisture areas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can monitor a single factor—atmospheric moisture—instead of several .
This is because atmospheric moisture is affected by other factors that can influence drought development , such as wind speed and sea surface temperature .
The next step is to see how good of a predictor this measure ultimately is .
“ How reliable is it , and how much lead time does it give us ?
” Kalansky says .
Chris Funk , who develops drought early-warning systems for African countries and was not involved with the new research , is all set @ @ @ @ @ @ @ m a big fan of this work—it ’ s really exciting , ” he says , adding that landfalling droughts are potentially quite predictable as a result of their relatively long lead time .
“ We ’ re going to need that because climate change is making droughts more severe.
” Funk , director of the Climate Hazards Center at the University of California , Santa Barbara , plans to expand his African early-warning systems to include landfalling droughts , which will entail tracking them hundreds or even thousands of kilometers offshore .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ s appealing about this work is that the data are already there .
There ’ s an incredible array of satellite observations , ” he says .
“ Landfalling droughts give us a new pattern to look for .
”

Droughts conjure images of vast expanses of hard, cracked soil and parched plants, but new research suggests that disastrous dry spells can develop over the wettest place of all: the ocean. Low-moisture air masses sometimes form and migrate thousands of kilometers over the sea, similar to the way hurricanes behave. These dry-air regions are less coherent, changing shape as they develop, however, and they move much slower. Some take more than half a year before they hit land, where they can destroy crops and threaten water security. Yet the long travel time means forecasters might be able to predict when this newly recognized type of drought will impact key regions, such as the western U.S.
“Thinking about droughts as a dynamic hazard is a new idea,” says environmental engineer Julio Herrera Estrada, who helped discover the phenomenon. He and his Stanford University postdoctoral advisor Noah Diffenbaugh describe what they have dubbed “landfalling droughts” in a study published this fall in Water Resources Research.
Herrera Estrada and Diffenbaugh made their discovery by retroactively following areas of relatively low atmospheric moisture worldwide, over both land and sea, from meteorological records between 1981 and 2018. “We watched them change shape from month to month and tracked how they moved in space and time,” says Herrera Estrada, who now focuses on sustainability as an applied scientist for Descartes Labs, which is based in Santa Fe, N.M. The researchers found that most areas of drought began and ended entirely over either the ocean or land. But one in six of the droughts afflicting continents turned out to have started over the ocean. “It’s not an obvious thing to wrap your head around. It’s a little counterintuitive to think about droughts over the ocean, because it’s wet,” Herrera Estrada says. “But there can still be lower rainfall over the ocean.”
Drought has affected more of the world’s population than tsunamis, earthquakes or any other natural hazard in the past 40 years, killing and displacing people by the millions, according to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. And landfalling droughts are particularly extreme, compared with conventional ones: on average worldwide, they can be one third drier and can grow nearly four times as fast and more than five times larger. The researchers did not investigate why they are more severe, but “one idea is that the atmospheric patterns responsible for landfalling droughts may themselves be different,” Herrera Estrada says. For example, the patterns that create and propel landfalling droughts may be larger than the patterns that drive those that form, and remain, over land.
The hotspots for landfalling droughts seem to include western North America, eastern South America, southwestern Africa and eastern Asia. The researchers are not yet sure why and say the factors that form and influence landfalling droughts may vary in different parts of the world. In western North America, for example, they found that these droughts are linked to areas of high pressure that block rainstorms and thus might initiate dry spells. Herrera Estrada speculates that as high-pressure areas shift, landfalling droughts may develop along their path. Once these droughts make landfall, high-pressure zones could then lock them in place. For example, a notorious high-pressure system called the “ridiculously resilient ridge” was stubbornly parked off the U.S. West Coast during much of California’s 2011–2017 drought—among its worst in recorded history.
Herrera Estrada and Diffenbaugh hope monitoring landfalling droughts will bolster prediction and preparation in California and other hotspots. “Seasonal forecasting is really hard,” says Julie Kalansky, a climate expert at the federally funded California-Nevada Climate Applications Program, who was not involved in the new research. She welcomes novel approaches to this problem and thinks tracking low-moisture areas over the ocean has promise because researchers can monitor a single factor—atmospheric moisture—instead of several. This is because atmospheric moisture is affected by other factors that can influence drought development, such as wind speed and sea surface temperature. The next step is to see how good of a predictor this measure ultimately is. “How reliable is it, and how much lead time does it give us?” Kalansky says.
Chris Funk, who develops drought early-warning systems for African countries and was not involved with the new research, is all set to find out. “I’m a big fan of this work—it’s really exciting,” he says, adding that landfalling droughts are potentially quite predictable as a result of their relatively long lead time. “We’re going to need that because climate change is making droughts more severe.” Funk, director of the Climate Hazards Center at the University of California, Santa Barbara, plans to expand his African early-warning systems to include landfalling droughts, which will entail tracking them hundreds or even thousands of kilometers offshore. “One of the things that’s appealing about this work is that the data are already there. There’s an incredible array of satellite observations,” he says. “Landfalling droughts give us a new pattern to look for.”


scientificamerican--2020-11-23--Yoga May Bolster the Brain Regions Most Affected by Aging

I 'll be honest : I 'm something of a yoga nut .
I 've practiced for decades and recently became a certified yoga teacher .
But , to be honest again , some of the health claims I 've heard about yoga make me squirm .
Does yoga really fix poor digestion ?
How on earth can it regulate thyroid function ?
In yoga classes , I sometimes struggle to calm my mind when a teacher invites us to do the anatomically impossible : “ Breathe into your kidneys.
” Yoga is deeply linked to traditional Eastern medicine and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ system of energy channels and nexuses—a perspective that does not easily align with Western medicine .
But since the start of this century , scientific research on yoga has exploded .
Many recent studies assess yoga as a “ complementary therapy ” to be used alongside other treatments for problems such as back pain , depression , anxiety and arthritis .
Such research often has found that the practice can help .
Still , yoga studies tend to be of uneven quality , often relying on self-reported survey data .
For that reason @ @ @ @ @ @ @ review paper that focused on a more objective measure : brain scans .
Though far from definitive , the findings hint that the practice may improve brain health , and they indicate a way to bring yoga and science more convincingly together .
The review , led by Neha Gothe , director of the Exercise Psychology Lab at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign , examined 11 peer-reviewed papers that used various types of brain scans to assess the impact of yoga practice on the brain .
Gothe and her colleagues limited their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ major elements of yoga were included : the physical poses , breathing exercises , and meditation or mindfulness .
Six of the studies compared the brains of longtime practitioners to “ yoga-naive ” people who were typically matched by age , health , and fitness or level of physical activity .
Five examined yoga as an intervention , scanning the brains of subjects before and after they were randomly assigned to a defined period of yoga practice or a control group .
Gothe admits that this is a “ nascent field , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Yet despite varied populations , three patterns emerged with some consistency : yoga practice could be linked to increased gray matter volume in the hippocampus , a key structure for memory ; increased volume in certain regions of the prefrontal cortex , the seat of higher-order cognition ; and greater connectivity across the default mode network .
This network plays a role in processing memories and emotions and “ what we call self-referential processing—processing information about yourself , ” explains Jessica Damoiseaux , a cognitive neuroscientist at Wayne State University and co-author @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of having more gray matter volume in these regions is not entirely clear , she says , but “ it suggests there may be more connections between neurons , which can indicate better functioning.
” Damoiseaux 's research focuses on aging-related changes in the brain , and she notes that the structures that seem to be beefed up by yoga are ones that tend to shrink with aging , especially in people with dementia .
The greater volumes linked to yoga are similar to those seen in studies of aerobic exercise .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anything special about yoga , with its meditative components , or is it just another brain-preserving workout ?
At this point it 's hard to say .
“ The nice thing about yoga is that it combines a whole bunch of things that are good for you , ” but “ that makes it messy to study , ” observes Catherine Bushnell , a senior investigator at the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health , part of the National Institutes of Health .
In the small observational studies that have been done @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cause-effect relationship between yoga and changes in brain anatomy and function .
In her own work , for instance , Bushnell has found that veteran yoga practitioners have an increased tolerance for pain compared with non-yogis , and tolerance is associated with increased gray matter in a region called the insular cortex .
But she can not say that yoga is directly responsible .
“ It could be something about your personality that makes you want to do yoga , and that same personality factor could contribute to more gray matter , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with better studies that build on the smaller experiments .
Gothe , for example , recently received a federal grant for a study that will randomly assign 168 older adults to six months of classes of yoga , aerobic exercise , or stretching and strengthening .
The goal is to compare the impact of the different regimens on brain anatomy and cognitive performance .
Says Bushnell : “ It 's exactly the kind of trial we need .
”

I'll be honest: I'm something of a yoga nut. I've practiced for decades and recently became a certified yoga teacher. But, to be honest again, some of the health claims I've heard about yoga make me squirm. Does yoga really fix poor digestion? How on earth can it regulate thyroid function? In yoga classes, I sometimes struggle to calm my mind when a teacher invites us to do the anatomically impossible: “Breathe into your kidneys.”
Yoga is deeply linked to traditional Eastern medicine and a view of the body as a system of energy channels and nexuses—a perspective that does not easily align with Western medicine. But since the start of this century, scientific research on yoga has exploded. Many recent studies assess yoga as a “complementary therapy” to be used alongside other treatments for problems such as back pain, depression, anxiety and arthritis. Such research often has found that the practice can help. Still, yoga studies tend to be of uneven quality, often relying on self-reported survey data. For that reason, I was struck by a 2019 review paper that focused on a more objective measure: brain scans. Though far from definitive, the findings hint that the practice may improve brain health, and they indicate a way to bring yoga and science more convincingly together.
The review, led by Neha Gothe, director of the Exercise Psychology Lab at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, examined 11 peer-reviewed papers that used various types of brain scans to assess the impact of yoga practice on the brain. Gothe and her colleagues limited their review to studies in which all three major elements of yoga were included: the physical poses, breathing exercises, and meditation or mindfulness. Six of the studies compared the brains of longtime practitioners to “yoga-naive” people who were typically matched by age, health, and fitness or level of physical activity. Five examined yoga as an intervention, scanning the brains of subjects before and after they were randomly assigned to a defined period of yoga practice or a control group.
Gothe admits that this is a “nascent field,” and most of the studies were small. Yet despite varied populations, three patterns emerged with some consistency: yoga practice could be linked to increased gray matter volume in the hippocampus, a key structure for memory; increased volume in certain regions of the prefrontal cortex, the seat of higher-order cognition; and greater connectivity across the default mode network. This network plays a role in processing memories and emotions and “what we call self-referential processing—processing information about yourself,” explains Jessica Damoiseaux, a cognitive neuroscientist at Wayne State University and co-author of the review paper. The significance of having more gray matter volume in these regions is not entirely clear, she says, but “it suggests there may be more connections between neurons, which can indicate better functioning.”
Damoiseaux's research focuses on aging-related changes in the brain, and she notes that the structures that seem to be beefed up by yoga are ones that tend to shrink with aging, especially in people with dementia. The greater volumes linked to yoga are similar to those seen in studies of aerobic exercise. This raises a question: Is there really anything special about yoga, with its meditative components, or is it just another brain-preserving workout?
At this point it's hard to say. “The nice thing about yoga is that it combines a whole bunch of things that are good for you,” but “that makes it messy to study,” observes Catherine Bushnell, a senior investigator at the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, part of the National Institutes of Health. In the small observational studies that have been done, it is difficult to establish a cause-effect relationship between yoga and changes in brain anatomy and function. In her own work, for instance, Bushnell has found that veteran yoga practitioners have an increased tolerance for pain compared with non-yogis, and tolerance is associated with increased gray matter in a region called the insular cortex. But she cannot say that yoga is directly responsible. “It could be something about your personality that makes you want to do yoga, and that same personality factor could contribute to more gray matter,” she says.
Clearer answers will come with better studies that build on the smaller experiments. Gothe, for example, recently received a federal grant for a study that will randomly assign 168 older adults to six months of classes of yoga, aerobic exercise, or stretching and strengthening. The goal is to compare the impact of the different regimens on brain anatomy and cognitive performance. Says Bushnell: “It's exactly the kind of trial we need.”


scientificamerican--2020-11-23--How to Minimize COVID Risk and Enjoy the Holidays

Anthony Fauci is not celebrating Thanksgiving with his three adult daughters this year .
The now famous director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases said in an American University Webinar that as much as he would love to spend the holiday with his kids , they had told him , “ We want you and Mommy to have a nice , quiet dinner.
” Fauci may be “ a ‘ young , ’ vigorous guy , ” they said , but he is also 79 years old—and that puts him in a vulnerable category for COVID-19 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ across the country , have decided to send their love via Zoom .
With COVID-19 cases hitting an all-time high , a decision not to gather in person may be the most loving one a family can make this holiday season .
This is especially the case if its members include individuals in higher-risk categories , such as older adults and people with diabetes or cancer , to name just a few .
But not every type of holiday celebration carries the same risk , and the dangers of people getting together need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ social interaction , says infectious disease epidemiologist Julia Marcus of Harvard Medical School .
“ For some people , there are going to be risks very [ much ] worth taking , ” she says .
There is no such thing as a totally COVID-safe family gathering .
But here are some ways to reduce the dangers .
One would ideally want to minimize the total numbers of both attendees and households involved , Marcus says .
People who live together are essentially combining their exposure , so think of things in terms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ together .
In general , a celebration with 10 residents from a single household will be lower risk than a gathering involving five couples from five different households , Marcus says—unless , of course , someone in the 10-person home is a frontline worker , and those five couples have strictly quarantined for two weeks prior to the gathering and have avoided social contacts on their way to the event .
Individual circumstances matter , and that is why it is difficult to put hard-and-fast numbers on how many people are too many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ guest list , consider the risk each specific attendee poses , as well as how much risk each person is comfortable taking on .
Some cities , counties and states have limits on gathering sizes .
These restrictions are subject to change , so check the latest health directives before finalizing plans , says Matt Willis , public health officer of California ’ s Marin County .
Even a small gathering can seed an outbreak .
Texas resident Tony Green is a self-described former COVID skeptic who came down with the virus at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in which there had been no masking or distancing .
“ I have no idea which one of us brought the virus into the house , but all six of us left with it , ” Green told the Washington Post .
Those six cases more than doubled , and before the ordeal was over , he was hospitalized with COVID-19 , and his father-in-law and another family member died of the disease .
It is safest to celebrate with people within your community so as to avoid transmission among different regions , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and medical director of the Special Pathogens Unit at Boston Medical Center .
And Willis says that if people travel between communities ( especially to or from ones with high coronavirus case numbers ) , “ a single Thanksgiving Day could fuel a community-wide surge.
” Before going anywhere , Bhadelia suggests checking how the epidemic is playing out in your local region at the time of travel .
It is difficult to put a strict cutoff on what kind of COVID-19 numbers should be deal breakers , but she says the test @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in any area where attendees will come from or travel to .
If you must travel , the safest way is by car .
Properly distancing in the confined space of a vehicle is impossible , so it is best to travel only with household members , Willis says .
If that is not possible , make sure everyone is wearing a mask and roll down the windows , says Joseph Allen , who studies risk science as director of the Healthy Buildings program at the Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the effects of keeping the windows down three inches and found doing so could “ dramatically decrease the concentration of viral particles in the car , ” he says .
The major risk from air travel comes from airports , where people mingle with others from across the country or elsewhere , says Gretchen Snoeyenbos Newman , an assistant professor of infectious disease at Wayne State University .
* Airplane ventilation systems can do a pretty good job , but they usually only function when the plane ’ s engines are on , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up on the ground for an extended period without the plane running , that can mean “ lots of people packed into a sardine can without ventilation , ” she adds .
Bhadelia recommends wearing both a mask and face shield on the plane .
The best way to cut the risk of transmitting the virus is to wear a mask , stay outside and keep six feet apart .
“ We ’ re seeing very few outbreaks [ that are ] traceable to outdoor gatherings , especially if people are covering their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Willis says .
He adds that his department ’ s contact tracing has shown that “ the most common cause of transmission is indoor gatherings .
It ’ s parties.
” Obviously , not every part of the country is conducive to outdoor holiday gatherings , so you might have to get creative , says A. Marm Kilpatrick , an infectious disease researcher at the University of California , Santa Cruz .
This could mean celebrating Thanksgiving a few weeks early—or next spring , when the weather is nicer—or even swapping a big @ @ @ @ @ @ @ activity such as hiking , skiing or gathering around a firepit .
“ Make sure you ’ re having a very specific conversation about what you are and are not going to do in the weeks leading up to the visit , ” Newman says .
Communicate your activities and risks to family and friends so they can assess whether the risk for them is too great .
What you want to avoid is surprise exposure , where you get to the gathering and find out that someone else there has been doing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to you , says Ellie Murray , an epidemiologist at the Boston University School of Public Health .
Newman and her wife are both frontline workers and have agreed to avoid anything else that exposes them to other people .
They want to keep their risk as low as possible so they can feel comfortable having their parents come and spend time with their newborn baby .
Murray encourages people to talk about their feelings on the ways things are different this year .
Wearing masks at a family gathering may “ feel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and it is okay to say so .
Another approach is to poke fun .
“ Maybe instead of an ugly Christmas sweater contest , you have an ugly Christmas mask contest , ” she says .
For two weeks before the get-together , everyone involved should be scrupulous about good COVID behavior : wearing masks , social distancing and reducing contact with people from outside the home as much as possible , Newman says .
Kilpatrick says the least risky way to include elderly or other at-risk relatives is to have attendees @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , avoiding all in-person social contact , and then drive to the gathering while being very careful about interactions along the way .
If conducted carefully , this strategy can substantially lower risks of transmission , but Kilpatrick notes that only a privileged few can pull it off .
If quarantining is impossible , though , you can still take steps to limit your exposures prior to the gathering .
Testing is a good idea if it is available , and Newman suggests the ideal time for it is five to seven days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of your quarantine bubble .
Do not use a test as an excuse to be complacent , however .
“ Tests are not perfect , ” Murray says—a negative test is no guarantee that you do not have the virus .
“ If you ’ re recently infected , you can still test negative for a little while , ” she says .
“ We saw that with the White House outbreak : people tested negative in the morning and had symptoms in the afternoon.
” Have a plan B ready .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If your area has a sudden spike in cases , you ’ ll want to change your plans , ” Murray says .
Her research group has created a guide to celebrating the holidays during the pandemic .
If figuring out how to celebrate the holidays feels difficult , that ’ s because it is .
“ There are no easy answers , and it ’ s exhausting to be making these decisions on an everyday basis for such a long period of time , ” Marcus says .
It is important to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ safe ” and “ unsafe ” but are instead on a continuum of risk .
“ Everything we do to adapt our lives to this virus is going to have some tradeoff , ” Marcus says , and accepting and acknowledging those trade-offs can be helpful .
Pandemic fatigue is no reason to let your guard down , Willis warns .
The very safest way to celebrate this year is still together but “ heart-to-heart , not face-to-face , ” he says .
“ I don ’ t want to give up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that.
” Read more about the coronavirus outbreak from Scientific American here .
And read coverage from our international network of magazines here .
*Editor ’ s Note ( 11/10/20 ) : This sentence was updated after posting to correct Gretchen Snoeyenbos Newman ’ s current affiliation .

Anthony Fauci is not celebrating Thanksgiving with his three adult daughters this year. The now famous director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases said in an American University Webinar that as much as he would love to spend the holiday with his kids, they had told him, “We want you and Mommy to have a nice, quiet dinner.” Fauci may be “a ‘young,’ vigorous guy,” they said, but he is also 79 years old—and that puts him in a vulnerable category for COVID-19. So his children, who are spread across the country, have decided to send their love via Zoom.
With COVID-19 cases hitting an all-time high, a decision not to gather in person may be the most loving one a family can make this holiday season. This is especially the case if its members include individuals in higher-risk categories, such as older adults and people with diabetes or cancer, to name just a few. But not every type of holiday celebration carries the same risk, and the dangers of people getting together need to be weighed against the benefits of social interaction, says infectious disease epidemiologist Julia Marcus of Harvard Medical School. “For some people, there are going to be risks very [much] worth taking,” she says.
There is no such thing as a totally COVID-safe family gathering. But here are some ways to reduce the dangers.
Keep It Small
One would ideally want to minimize the total numbers of both attendees and households involved, Marcus says. People who live together are essentially combining their exposure, so think of things in terms of how many contacts you are bringing together. In general, a celebration with 10 residents from a single household will be lower risk than a gathering involving five couples from five different households, Marcus says—unless, of course, someone in the 10-person home is a frontline worker, and those five couples have strictly quarantined for two weeks prior to the gathering and have avoided social contacts on their way to the event. Individual circumstances matter, and that is why it is difficult to put hard-and-fast numbers on how many people are too many, Marcus says. When making the guest list, consider the risk each specific attendee poses, as well as how much risk each person is comfortable taking on.
Some cities, counties and states have limits on gathering sizes. These restrictions are subject to change, so check the latest health directives before finalizing plans, says Matt Willis, public health officer of California’s Marin County.
Even a small gathering can seed an outbreak. Texas resident Tony Green is a self-described former COVID skeptic who came down with the virus at a six-person family gathering at his home in which there had been no masking or distancing. “I have no idea which one of us brought the virus into the house, but all six of us left with it,” Green told the Washington Post. Those six cases more than doubled, and before the ordeal was over, he was hospitalized with COVID-19, and his father-in-law and another family member died of the disease.
Limit Travel
It is safest to celebrate with people within your community so as to avoid transmission among different regions, says Nahid Bhadelia, an infectious-diseases physician and medical director of the Special Pathogens Unit at Boston Medical Center. And Willis says that if people travel between communities (especially to or from ones with high coronavirus case numbers), “a single Thanksgiving Day could fuel a community-wide surge.”
Before going anywhere, Bhadelia suggests checking how the epidemic is playing out in your local region at the time of travel. It is difficult to put a strict cutoff on what kind of COVID-19 numbers should be deal breakers, but she says the test positivity rate should be under 5 percent in any area where attendees will come from or travel to.
If you must travel, the safest way is by car. Properly distancing in the confined space of a vehicle is impossible, so it is best to travel only with household members, Willis says. If that is not possible, make sure everyone is wearing a mask and roll down the windows, says Joseph Allen, who studies risk science as director of the Healthy Buildings program at the Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health. Allen and his colleagues modeled the effects of keeping the windows down three inches and found doing so could “dramatically decrease the concentration of viral particles in the car,” he says.
The major risk from air travel comes from airports, where people mingle with others from across the country or elsewhere, says Gretchen Snoeyenbos Newman, an assistant professor of infectious disease at Wayne State University.* Airplane ventilation systems can do a pretty good job, but they usually only function when the plane’s engines are on, Bhadelia says. So if you end up on the ground for an extended period without the plane running, that can mean “lots of people packed into a sardine can without ventilation,” she adds. Bhadelia recommends wearing both a mask and face shield on the plane.
Stay Outdoors and Distance
The best way to cut the risk of transmitting the virus is to wear a mask, stay outside and keep six feet apart. “We’re seeing very few outbreaks [that are] traceable to outdoor gatherings, especially if people are covering their faces and practicing physical distancing,” Willis says. He adds that his department’s contact tracing has shown that “the most common cause of transmission is indoor gatherings. It’s parties.”
Obviously, not every part of the country is conducive to outdoor holiday gatherings, so you might have to get creative, says A. Marm Kilpatrick, an infectious disease researcher at the University of California, Santa Cruz. This could mean celebrating Thanksgiving a few weeks early—or next spring, when the weather is nicer—or even swapping a big sit-down meal indoors with a lower-risk outdoor activity such as hiking, skiing or gathering around a firepit.
Set Ground Rules Early
“Make sure you’re having a very specific conversation about what you are and are not going to do in the weeks leading up to the visit,” Newman says. Communicate your activities and risks to family and friends so they can assess whether the risk for them is too great. What you want to avoid is surprise exposure, where you get to the gathering and find out that someone else there has been doing things that feel like too much risk to you, says Ellie Murray, an epidemiologist at the Boston University School of Public Health.
Newman and her wife are both frontline workers and have agreed to avoid anything else that exposes them to other people. They want to keep their risk as low as possible so they can feel comfortable having their parents come and spend time with their newborn baby.
Murray encourages people to talk about their feelings on the ways things are different this year. Wearing masks at a family gathering may “feel a little weird” she says, and it is okay to say so. Another approach is to poke fun. “Maybe instead of an ugly Christmas sweater contest, you have an ugly Christmas mask contest,” she says.
Take Precautions before Gathering
For two weeks before the get-together, everyone involved should be scrupulous about good COVID behavior: wearing masks, social distancing and reducing contact with people from outside the home as much as possible, Newman says.
Kilpatrick says the least risky way to include elderly or other at-risk relatives is to have attendees sequester themselves at home for two weeks, avoiding all in-person social contact, and then drive to the gathering while being very careful about interactions along the way. If conducted carefully, this strategy can substantially lower risks of transmission, but Kilpatrick notes that only a privileged few can pull it off. If quarantining is impossible, though, you can still take steps to limit your exposures prior to the gathering.
Testing is a good idea if it is available, and Newman suggests the ideal time for it is five to seven days after your last exposure to someone outside of your quarantine bubble. Do not use a test as an excuse to be complacent, however. “Tests are not perfect,” Murray says—a negative test is no guarantee that you do not have the virus. “If you’re recently infected, you can still test negative for a little while,” she says. “We saw that with the White House outbreak: people tested negative in the morning and had symptoms in the afternoon.”
Be Flexible
Have a plan B ready. “Things could change on short notice. If your area has a sudden spike in cases, you’ll want to change your plans,” Murray says. Her research group has created a guide to celebrating the holidays during the pandemic.
If figuring out how to celebrate the holidays feels difficult, that’s because it is. “There are no easy answers, and it’s exhausting to be making these decisions on an everyday basis for such a long period of time,” Marcus says. It is important to recognize that the choices are not between “safe” and “unsafe” but are instead on a continuum of risk. “Everything we do to adapt our lives to this virus is going to have some tradeoff,” Marcus says, and accepting and acknowledging those trade-offs can be helpful.
Pandemic fatigue is no reason to let your guard down, Willis warns. The very safest way to celebrate this year is still together but “heart-to-heart, not face-to-face,” he says. “I don’t want to give up on the hope that people can do that.”
Read more about the coronavirus outbreak from Scientific American here. And read coverage from our international network of magazines here.
*Editor’s Note (11/10/20): This sentence was updated after posting to correct Gretchen Snoeyenbos Newman’s current affiliation.


scientificamerican--2020-11-23--Distrust Authorities, Including Me

Distrust Authorities, Including Me

Like many teachers , I ’ ve agonized over what to tell my students about the crises convulsing us lately , the pandemic and U.S. presidential election .
What lessons can we draw from what ’ s happened ?
I ’ ve decided to double down on the anti-wisdom I lay on all my classes : Distrust authorities , including me .
I ’ ve inadvertently demonstrated that precept for my students .
I ’ m a lefty with an optimistic streak , so I predicted that Joe Biden would win handily on election night ; that was my take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Florida , Ohio and other swing states .
Pollsters , I told my students , had surely corrected mistakes they made four years ago , when they underestimated Trump ’ s support .
But once again pollsters got “ Donald Trump wrong , ” as Politico put it .
Wishful thinking led me , and perhaps many of them , astray .
Optimism has also distorted my view of the coronavirus .
Last March , I took heart from warnings by Stanford epidemiologist John Ioannidis that we might be overestimating the deadliness of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He predicted that the U.S. death toll might reach only 10,000 people , lower than the average annual toll of seasonal flu .
I wanted Ioannidis to be right , and his analysis seemed plausible to me , but his prediction turned out to be wrong by more than an order of magnitude .
Ironically , Ioannidis is renowned for raising doubts about scientific experts .
In his blockbuster 2005 article “ Why Most Published Research Findings Are False , ” Ioannidis presented evidence that a majority of the claims in peer-reviewed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then , Ioannidis has continued documenting problems in the scientific literature and tracing them to factors such as confirmation bias , competition for funding and conflicts of interest .
“ There is increasing evidence that some of the ways we conduct , evaluate , report and disseminate research are miserably ineffective , ” Ioannidis declared in Scientific American in 2018 .
He recommends investments in research on “ how to get the best science and how to choose and reward the best scientists .
We should not trust opinion ( including my own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ found that journals are more likely to publish “ extreme , spectacular results ( the largest treatment effects , the strongest associations , or the most unusually novel and exciting biological stories ) , ” as he and two co-authors put it in a 2008 paper , “ Why Current Publication Practices May Distort Science.
” Spectacular results , of course , are more likely to be wrong .
Although the scientific community has attacked Ioannidis ’ s views of COVID-19 , his critiques of the scientific literature have been embraced .
Another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ psychologist Philip Tetlock of the University of Pennsylvania .
In his 2005 book Expert Political Judgment , Tetlock reported on a study of 284 professional pundits , including academics , government officials and journalists , who comment on politics and related issues via mass media and in scholarly journals and conferences .
Tetlock assessed the accuracy of 28,000 of these pundits ’ predictions concerning elections , wars , economic collapses and other events .
The experts ’ accuracy was no better than chance , or a dart-throwing monkey , as Tetlock put it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accuracy was inversely proportional to their prominence .
That is , the more exposure they got from CNN , Fox News , the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times , the less likely their predictions were to hold up .
This counterintuitive finding makes sense when you consider that pundits get more attention by making dramatic pronouncements , which are also more likely to be wrong .
As a science journalist , I ’ ve criticized lots of experts , including Nobel Prize winners and tenured professors at fancy universities .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and multiverse theories and biological theories of war .
My last book argued that all “ solutions ” to the mind-body problem are flawed , and that experts favor certain theories for subjective reasons .
Over roughly the last year , I ’ ve presented evidence that cancer care , psychiatry and medicine in general have been compromised by financial conflicts of interest .
In addition to telling my students about my work , and that of Ioannidis and Tetlock , I mention philosophical critiques of science mounted by Thomas Kuhn and Karl @ @ @ @ @ @ @ theory is true , Popper insisted ; they can only falsify or disprove it .
Kuhn , similarly , warned that absolute truth is unattainable ; scientific theories are always provisional , subject to change .
But after dumping all this skepticism on my students , I warn them not to be too skeptical .
I remind them that science , in spite of its fallibility , represents an extraordinarily powerful method for understanding and manipulating nature .
Science has helped us vanquish smallpox and other diseases , send spacecraft to the moon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ smartphones and other technologies that have transformed our planet .
We believe in the bedrock theories of science—quantum mechanics , relativity , the big bang , the theory of evolution , the genetic code—because scientists have amassed overwhelming evidence for them .
We should believe that vaccines are effective and that fossil-fuel emissions are warming the planet for the same reason .
So yes , I tell my students , distrust scientists and other experts , while never forgetting that sometimes they get things right .
Although Ioannidis was wrong about the deadliness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unreliability of peer-reviewed science have been widely accepted because he backs them up with data .
Scientists can also earn our trust , paradoxically , by admitting their fallibility .
Many of us trust what Anthony Fauci says about COVID-19 because he “ admits uncertainties and failings , ” as a Scientific American article has noted .
In his 2015 book Superforecasters , Tetlock presents evidence that ordinary people , nonprofessionals , can cultivate a better-than-average ability to predict events such as elections , wars and economic booms and busts .
These “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ open-minded , persistent and self-critical , ” as one reviewer put it ( italics added ) .
Self-criticism , I tell my students , is difficult .
It ’ s much easier to spot flawed thinking in others than in yourself .
How do I practice self-criticism ?
I try to be transparent—with students , readers and myself—about my own prejudices .
In a new book , Pay Attention : Sex , Death , and Science , a lightly fictionalized memoir , I reveal , perhaps too candidly , how my rationality , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with my desires and fears .
I also try to understand the perspectives of those with whom I disagree .
That ’ s why , last spring , I spoke to a Texan strength-training guru and Trump supporter who thought that the U.S. was overreacting to COVID-19 .
I have even sought positive things to say about Trump .
For example , I appreciate his desire to extricate the U.S. from wars in Afghanistan and Syria , which his own generals thwarted .
I nonetheless voted against Trump because he is a spectacularly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be a liar over and over again .
Humility and self-criticism are utterly alien to his nature .
He believes , or professes to believe , only that which helps him maintain power , regardless of evidence .
Now that the election is over , I find myself once again peering into the future .
Will Trump ’ s devotees and the Republican Party accept Joe Biden and Kamala Harris as their leaders ?
Will the Pfizer vaccine turn out to be as effective as a small , preliminary trial seems to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but not that hard , to keep my wishful thinking in check .
A Dig Through Old Files Reminds Me Why I ’ m So Critical of Science Advice to Young Science Writers : Ask “ What Would Chomsky Think ?
”

Like many teachers, I’ve agonized over what to tell my students about the crises convulsing us lately, the pandemic and U.S. presidential election. What lessons can we draw from what’s happened? I’ve decided to double down on the anti-wisdom I lay on all my classes: Distrust authorities, including me.
I’ve inadvertently demonstrated that precept for my students. I’m a lefty with an optimistic streak, so I predicted that Joe Biden would win handily on election night; that was my take on polls showing Biden leading Trump in Florida, Ohio and other swing states. Pollsters, I told my students, had surely corrected mistakes they made four years ago, when they underestimated Trump’s support. But once again pollsters got “Donald Trump wrong,” as Politico put it. Wishful thinking led me, and perhaps many of them, astray.
Optimism has also distorted my view of the coronavirus. Last March, I took heart from warnings by Stanford epidemiologist John Ioannidis that we might be overestimating the deadliness of the virus and hence overreacting to it. He predicted that the U.S. death toll might reach only 10,000 people, lower than the average annual toll of seasonal flu. I wanted Ioannidis to be right, and his analysis seemed plausible to me, but his prediction turned out to be wrong by more than an order of magnitude.
Ironically, Ioannidis is renowned for raising doubts about scientific experts. In his blockbuster 2005 article “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False,” Ioannidis presented evidence that a majority of the claims in peer-reviewed papers cannot be corroborated. Since then, Ioannidis has continued documenting problems in the scientific literature and tracing them to factors such as confirmation bias, competition for funding and conflicts of interest.
“There is increasing evidence that some of the ways we conduct, evaluate, report and disseminate research are miserably ineffective,” Ioannidis declared in Scientific American in 2018. He recommends investments in research on “how to get the best science and how to choose and reward the best scientists. We should not trust opinion (including my own) without evidence.”
Ioannidis has also found that journals are more likely to publish “extreme, spectacular results (the largest treatment effects, the strongest associations, or the most unusually novel and exciting biological stories),” as he and two co-authors put it in a 2008 paper, “Why Current Publication Practices May Distort Science.” Spectacular results, of course, are more likely to be wrong. Although the scientific community has attacked Ioannidis’s views of COVID-19, his critiques of the scientific literature have been embraced.
Another notable expert critic of experts is social psychologist Philip Tetlock of the University of Pennsylvania. In his 2005 book Expert Political Judgment, Tetlock reported on a study of 284 professional pundits, including academics, government officials and journalists, who comment on politics and related issues via mass media and in scholarly journals and conferences. Tetlock assessed the accuracy of 28,000 of these pundits’ predictions concerning elections, wars, economic collapses and other events.
The experts’ accuracy was no better than chance, or a dart-throwing monkey, as Tetlock put it. Not only that, but their accuracy was inversely proportional to their prominence. That is, the more exposure they got from CNN, Fox News, the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times, the less likely their predictions were to hold up. This counterintuitive finding makes sense when you consider that pundits get more attention by making dramatic pronouncements, which are also more likely to be wrong.
As a science journalist, I’ve criticized lots of experts, including Nobel Prize winners and tenured professors at fancy universities. I’ve second-guessed proponents of string and multiverse theories and biological theories of war. My last book argued that all “solutions” to the mind-body problem are flawed, and that experts favor certain theories for subjective reasons. Over roughly the last year, I’ve presented evidence that cancer care, psychiatry and medicine in general have been compromised by financial conflicts of interest.
In addition to telling my students about my work, and that of Ioannidis and Tetlock, I mention philosophical critiques of science mounted by Thomas Kuhn and Karl Popper. Scientists can never prove a theory is true, Popper insisted; they can only falsify or disprove it. Kuhn, similarly, warned that absolute truth is unattainable; scientific theories are always provisional, subject to change.
But after dumping all this skepticism on my students, I warn them not to be too skeptical. I remind them that science, in spite of its fallibility, represents an extraordinarily powerful method for understanding and manipulating nature. Science has helped us vanquish smallpox and other diseases, send spacecraft to the moon and Mars, and invent jets, smartphones and other technologies that have transformed our planet.
We believe in the bedrock theories of science—quantum mechanics, relativity, the big bang, the theory of evolution, the genetic code—because scientists have amassed overwhelming evidence for them. We should believe that vaccines are effective and that fossil-fuel emissions are warming the planet for the same reason.
So yes, I tell my students, distrust scientists and other experts, while never forgetting that sometimes they get things right. Although Ioannidis was wrong about the deadliness of COVID-19, his claims about the unreliability of peer-reviewed science have been widely accepted because he backs them up with data.
Scientists can also earn our trust, paradoxically, by admitting their fallibility. Many of us trust what Anthony Fauci says about COVID-19 because he “admits uncertainties and failings,” as a Scientific American article has noted. In his 2015 book Superforecasters, Tetlock presents evidence that ordinary people, nonprofessionals, can cultivate a better-than-average ability to predict events such as elections, wars and economic booms and busts. These “superforecasters are “careful, curious, open-minded, persistent and self-critical,” as one reviewer put it (italics added).
Self-criticism, I tell my students, is difficult. It’s much easier to spot flawed thinking in others than in yourself. How do I practice self-criticism? I try to be transparent—with students, readers and myself—about my own prejudices. In a new book, Pay Attention: Sex, Death, and Science, a lightly fictionalized memoir, I reveal, perhaps too candidly, how my rationality, such as it is, is entangled with my desires and fears.
I also try to understand the perspectives of those with whom I disagree. That’s why, last spring, I spoke to a Texan strength-training guru and Trump supporter who thought that the U.S. was overreacting to COVID-19. I have even sought positive things to say about Trump. For example, I appreciate his desire to extricate the U.S. from wars in Afghanistan and Syria, which his own generals thwarted.
I nonetheless voted against Trump because he is a spectacularly untrustworthy authority, who has been proven to be a liar over and over again. Humility and self-criticism are utterly alien to his nature. He believes, or professes to believe, only that which helps him maintain power, regardless of evidence.
Now that the election is over, I find myself once again peering into the future. Will Trump’s devotees and the Republican Party accept Joe Biden and Kamala Harris as their leaders? Will the Pfizer vaccine turn out to be as effective as a small, preliminary trial seems to suggest? I’m trying hard, but not that hard, to keep my wishful thinking in check.
Further Reading:
A Dig Through Old Files Reminds Me Why I’m So Critical of Science
Advice to Young Science Writers: Ask “What Would Chomsky Think?”


scientificamerican--2020-11-23--Methane Hits Record High in Atmosphere as Fossil Fuel Companies Diverge

More than 60 oil and gas companies committed to a new framework today to report methane emissions as the United Nations reported that atmospheric levels of the greenhouse gas reached a record high .
The plan from the Climate & Clean Air Coalition ’ s Oil and Gas Methane Partnership ( OGMP ) tasks companies with reporting methane emissions from both their core operations as well as joint ventures .
As a part of the voluntary framework , companies will share their own methane reduction targets with OGMP , an initiative managed by the U.N .
Environment Programme .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ calls on companies to outline how they will realize their objectives to cut methane emissions .
The 62 companies that have joined OGMP represent an estimated 30 % of global oil and gas production , according to the partnership .
The group said it seeks to deliver a 45 % reduction in the oil and gas industry ’ s methane emissions by 2025 .
Individual targets from the companies—which include European firms like Equinor ASA , Total SE and Royal Dutch Shell PLC—will be reviewed periodically , in line with a “ common @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Methane is the chief component of natural gas .
Mark Brownstein , a senior vice president of energy at the Environmental Defense Fund , said while the framework is voluntary , it ’ s still an “ important contribution to advancing the cause ” of lowering oil and gas methane emissions .
EDF has worked with the Climate & Clean Air Coalition since 2014 , Brownstein said , and helped take OGMP and the methane reporting framework to its latest form .
“ For the first time , companies are committing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ science-based standards , as opposed to engineering estimates , ” Brownstein said .
According to the separate report today from the World Meteorological Organization—a U.N. agency—methane reached a new high in 2019 and has increased 161 % above preindustrial levels “ due to increased emissions from anthropogenic sources , ” including the fossil fuel industry .
Roughly 60 % of methane emitted into the atmosphere comes from man-made sources , like the development of fossil fuels , landfills , biomass burning and agriculture , the WMO report said .
According to Brownstein , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by industry often understate the true amount of emissions coming from oil and gas operations .
He called the oil and gas framework “ a step forward ” because it moves to reporting data based on field measurements and ongoing monitoring .
The suite of monitoring technologies available to companies spans from the use of drones to satellites .
Still , although the partnership “ applies to all segments of the oil and gas sector where material quantities of methane can be emitted , ” it does not pertain to chunks like oil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as “ gas end use.
” It also does not currently include U.S. oil and gas majors , which have historically lagged behind their European counterparts when it comes to climate targets ( Climatewire , Sept. 11 ) .
Manfredi Caltagirone , a program officer with the U.N .
Environment Programme , said although U.S. companies aren ’ t participating at the moment , the partnership is talking with multiple firms and noted that “ many OGMP member companies have assets in the U.S. ” Brownstein echoed Caltagirone and said that “ irrespective @ @ @ @ @ @ @ oil companies join , the process of bringing transparency around your emissions begins with this new program.
” The OGMP framework is meant to complement efforts like EDF ’ s MethaneSAT project , an initiative to measure emissions by satellite , he said .
These kinds of voluntary initiatives also have to be coupled with regulations , he said , like those under development in the European Union .
“ Voluntary programs are a complement to government action , but they are not a substitute for it , ” Brownstein said .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this voluntary strategy results in real and substantial emissions reductions has everything to do with whether and how the companies that are committing to this program actually follow through on what they are committing to.
” A spokesperson for Shell declined to comment for the story and spokespersons for Equinor and Total did not respond to inquiries .
Reprinted from Climatewire with permission from E & E News .
E & E provides daily coverage of essential energy and environmental news at www.eenews.net .

More than 60 oil and gas companies committed to a new framework today to report methane emissions as the United Nations reported that atmospheric levels of the greenhouse gas reached a record high.
The plan from the Climate & Clean Air Coalition’s Oil and Gas Methane Partnership (OGMP) tasks companies with reporting methane emissions from both their core operations as well as joint ventures. As a part of the voluntary framework, companies will share their own methane reduction targets with OGMP, an initiative managed by the U.N. Environment Programme.
The plan revamps an existing OGMP framework and calls on companies to outline how they will realize their objectives to cut methane emissions. The 62 companies that have joined OGMP represent an estimated 30% of global oil and gas production, according to the partnership. The group said it seeks to deliver a 45% reduction in the oil and gas industry’s methane emissions by 2025.
Individual targets from the companies—which include European firms like Equinor ASA, Total SE and Royal Dutch Shell PLC—will be reviewed periodically, in line with a “common objective to continuously reduce greenhouse gas emissions.” Methane is the chief component of natural gas.
Mark Brownstein, a senior vice president of energy at the Environmental Defense Fund, said while the framework is voluntary, it’s still an “important contribution to advancing the cause” of lowering oil and gas methane emissions.
EDF has worked with the Climate & Clean Air Coalition since 2014, Brownstein said, and helped take OGMP and the methane reporting framework to its latest form.
“For the first time, companies are committing to regularly measure their methane emissions using strict science-based standards, as opposed to engineering estimates,” Brownstein said.
According to the separate report today from the World Meteorological Organization—a U.N. agency—methane reached a new high in 2019 and has increased 161% above preindustrial levels “due to increased emissions from anthropogenic sources,” including the fossil fuel industry.
Roughly 60% of methane emitted into the atmosphere comes from man-made sources, like the development of fossil fuels, landfills, biomass burning and agriculture, the WMO report said.
According to Brownstein, methane emission estimates based on engineering calculations by industry often understate the true amount of emissions coming from oil and gas operations. He called the oil and gas framework “a step forward” because it moves to reporting data based on field measurements and ongoing monitoring. The suite of monitoring technologies available to companies spans from the use of drones to satellites.
Still, although the partnership “applies to all segments of the oil and gas sector where material quantities of methane can be emitted,” it does not pertain to chunks like oil refining and chemical manufacturing, as well as “gas end use.”
It also does not currently include U.S. oil and gas majors, which have historically lagged behind their European counterparts when it comes to climate targets (Climatewire, Sept. 11).
Manfredi Caltagirone, a program officer with the U.N. Environment Programme, said although U.S. companies aren’t participating at the moment, the partnership is talking with multiple firms and noted that “many OGMP member companies have assets in the U.S.”
Brownstein echoed Caltagirone and said that “irrespective of whether U.S. companies or other national oil companies join, the process of bringing transparency around your emissions begins with this new program.”
The OGMP framework is meant to complement efforts like EDF’s MethaneSAT project, an initiative to measure emissions by satellite, he said. These kinds of voluntary initiatives also have to be coupled with regulations, he said, like those under development in the European Union.
“Voluntary programs are a complement to government action, but they are not a substitute for it,” Brownstein said.
He cautioned that “the degree to which this voluntary strategy results in real and substantial emissions reductions has everything to do with whether and how the companies that are committing to this program actually follow through on what they are committing to.”
A spokesperson for Shell declined to comment for the story and spokespersons for Equinor and Total did not respond to inquiries.
Reprinted from Climatewire with permission from E&E News. E&E provides daily coverage of essential energy and environmental news at www.eenews.net.


scientificamerican--2020-11-23--Bumblebees' Self-Image Gets Them through Tight Spots

Sridhar Ravi was outdoors with his colleagues on a summer day in Germany when a group of bumblebees grabbed his attention .
As the bees made their way from flower to flower , they skillfully flew between obstacles , dodging branches and shrubs .
These actions seemed to require a complex awareness of one 's physical body in relation to one ’ s environment that had only been proven to exist in animals with large brains .
To examine this , a team of researchers at Australia ’ s University of New South Wales , Canberra , led by Ravi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inside their laboratory .
The bees could come and go via a tunnel , which could be partially blocked with an adjustable barrier .
Ravi and his team made the gap progressively smaller over time , and observed how the bees ’ reactions changed .
The study , published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , found the bumblebees measured the gap by flying side-to-side to scan it .
When the gap became narrower than their wingspan , the bees took a longer time to scan the opening .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ turned their bodies to fly through sideways .
Some of the bees ’ bodies did bump the sides of the narrowed opening—but every one of the 400 recorded flights through the gap was a success .
“ Over thousands of years nature has coded insects with some amazing attributes , ” Ravi says .
“ Our challenge now is to see how we can take this and apply similar coding to future robotic systems , enhancing their performance in the natural world .
”

Sridhar Ravi was outdoors with his colleagues on a summer day in Germany when a group of bumblebees grabbed his attention.
As the bees made their way from flower to flower, they skillfully flew between obstacles, dodging branches and shrubs. These actions seemed to require a complex awareness of one's physical body in relation to one’s environment that had only been proven to exist in animals with large brains.
To examine this, a team of researchers at Australia’s University of New South Wales, Canberra, led by Ravi, set up a hive of bumblebees inside their laboratory. The bees could come and go via a tunnel, which could be partially blocked with an adjustable barrier. Ravi and his team made the gap progressively smaller over time, and observed how the bees’ reactions changed.
The study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, found the bumblebees measured the gap by flying side-to-side to scan it. When the gap became narrower than their wingspan, the bees took a longer time to scan the opening. And then they did something remarkable: they turned their bodies to fly through sideways. Some of the bees’ bodies did bump the sides of the narrowed opening—but every one of the 400 recorded flights through the gap was a success.
“Over thousands of years nature has coded insects with some amazing attributes,” Ravi says. “Our challenge now is to see how we can take this and apply similar coding to future robotic systems, enhancing their performance in the natural world.”