Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NASA cancels greenhouse gas monitoring satellite due to cost
Associated Press ^ | November 29, 2022 | Seth Borenstein

Posted on 11/30/2022 10:06:57 PM PST by Olog-hai

NASA is canceling a planned satellite that was going to intensely monitor greenhouse gases over the Americas because it got too costly and complicated.

But the space agency said it will still be watching human-caused carbon pollution but in different ways.

NASA on Tuesday announced that its GeoCarb mission, which was supposed to be a low-cost satellite to monitor carbon dioxide, methane and how plant life changes over North and South America, was being killed because of cost overruns.

When it was announced six years ago, it was supposed to cost $166 million, but the latest NASA figures show costs would balloon to more than $600 million and it was years late, according to NASA Earth Sciences Director Karen St. Germain.

Unlike other satellites that monitor greenhouse gases from low Earth orbit and get different parts of the globe in a big picture, GeoCarb was supposed to be at a much higher altitude of 22,236 miles (35,786 kilometers) from one fixed place in orbit and focus intently on North and South America. That different and further perspective proved too difficult and costly to get done on budget and on time, St. Germain said. …

(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.com ...


TOPICS: Science; Weather
KEYWORDS: climatechange; climatechangehoax; fakenews; geocarb; globalwarming; globalwarminghoax; nasa; satellite
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 next last
To: Olog-hai

Cost, my derriere.

Bet the real reason is that Deep State knows the data would tell everyone who cared to look something Deep State didn’t want them to know.


21 posted on 12/01/2022 4:16:09 AM PST by mewzilla (We will never restore the republic if we don't first secure the ballot box.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai; All

Bad week for CO2 monitoring:

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4113074/posts

(As Mauna Loa spews out tons of CO2)


22 posted on 12/01/2022 4:17:41 AM PST by Drago
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla

I place my money on that one!!


23 posted on 12/01/2022 4:22:44 AM PST by sit-rep ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: mylife
since when has cost been an obstacle for nasa?

Since about 1970.

Maybe earlier.

The leftist advocates of the Welfare State whine and cry about NASA and Defense but spend trillions on socialism.

You've been lied to your whole life.

24 posted on 12/01/2022 4:27:00 AM PST by NorthMountain (... the right of the peopIe to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

More likely they feared it would provide accurate information.


25 posted on 12/01/2022 5:07:15 AM PST by BobL (By the way, low tonight in Latvia: 18 degrees, burrr!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Translation - all the data says their climate claims are Bull💩 so they will go with “Data-less Science” and just tell us that their claims are true without generating the data that disproves them.


26 posted on 12/01/2022 5:11:44 AM PST by trebb (So many fools - so little time...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
When it was announced six years ago, it was supposed to cost $166 million, but the latest NASA figures show costs would balloon to more than $600 million and it was years late, according to NASA Earth Sciences Director Karen St. Germain.

NASA has had a string of programs characterized by ballooning costs and serious delays. Maybe they should take a look at their management models.

NASA could spend a little more money looking at the greenhouse gas that is more powerful and plentiful as the real cause of climate change. It is not politically correct to explore the role of water vapor, the Sun, aerosols, and the ocean in climate change.

Perhaps woke management may not be so effective at NASA.

27 posted on 12/01/2022 5:19:43 AM PST by olezip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NorthMountain

Since Apollo, NASA gets enough to keep our space endeavors on life support.

I wouldn’t be surprised if this was truly a budget-cutting effort, but I also understand the cynicism of killing a program that may provide data countering the groupthink of climate activists.


28 posted on 12/01/2022 5:20:06 AM PST by kosciusko51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: kosciusko51
killing a program that may provide data countering the groupthink of climate activists.

I can certainly see why cynical people who don't pay a lot of attention to NASA would see it that way. I can't blame them, but I also don't give much credence to their opinions. I have friends at NASA, so I have more than average insight into what really goes on there. It doesn't take much to get a low profile program canned, and this one was begging for it.

I was somewhat amazed, over a long period of years, that JWST somehow managed to hang on and finally get launched. That, of course, was always a very high profile program.

29 posted on 12/01/2022 5:31:05 AM PST by NorthMountain (... the right of the peopIe to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

They probably figured out that this satellite would reveal their bullshit to be the bullshit that it is.


30 posted on 12/01/2022 5:34:16 AM PST by TalBlack (We have a Christian duty and a patriotic duty. God help us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NorthMountain

I wouldn’t be surprised if the overruns from James Webb didn’t affect this program, either.

After 30+ years in the aerospace industry, all I can really say about NASA’s funding is that it is capricious.


31 posted on 12/01/2022 5:37:46 AM PST by kosciusko51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Maybe it’s because every time they use satellite measurements it discredits the terrestrial ‘observations’ that they use to promote all the climate hype.

HmmmmMMMM???

I suggest that it was cancelled because data indicated that it would undermine their efforts under the carbon scheme.


32 posted on 12/01/2022 5:44:36 AM PST by logi_cal869 (-cynicus the "concern troll" a/o 10/03/2018 /!i!! &@$%&*(@ -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kosciusko51

Also, Congress can mandate what NASA must spend its money on. The recent SLS launch was years late and billions over budget, but Congress passed it so that former Space Shuttle contractors would still get money. Many in NASA would have liked to cancel the rocket and spend the money for other projects but Congress forced them to build it.


33 posted on 12/01/2022 5:56:07 AM PST by sloanrb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

The most catastrophic problem the world faces and NASA cancels one of the most valuable tools to help us understand the threat we are facing. NASA must want us all to die.


34 posted on 12/01/2022 6:02:18 AM PST by VTenigma (Conspiracy theory is the new "spoiler alert")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sloanrb

That is the constant struggle within NASA. There is the pure science side, and the manned space side.

The manned side is necessary, for the ‘60s saying, “No Buck Rogers, no bucks” still holds sway with many in Congress.

Without the hope of man physically reaching beyond the Earth, space research funding would have dried up even further than it had.


35 posted on 12/01/2022 6:03:24 AM PST by kosciusko51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: sloanrb

Also, regarding “Congress can mandate what NASA must spend its money on”: that is why I called their spending “capricious”.


36 posted on 12/01/2022 6:06:09 AM PST by kosciusko51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Nothing to do with money it’s because there would be nothing for it to do and end their scam


37 posted on 12/01/2022 6:26:01 AM PST by butlerweave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Imagine that…knowing that real data will destroy their fairytale…


38 posted on 12/01/2022 6:28:15 AM PST by TnTnTn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: dayglored
I suspect that somebody realized the satellite would end up providing data showing that Global Warming, Climate Change, and the rest is a pile of poo. So they had to kill it.

Nailed it!

We have had satellite systems up since the 1970s that globally and accurately measure temperature, sea surface height, solar irradiance, and the earth’s black body radiation.

The raw data from these accurate and precise systems do not support anthropogenic Climate Change. Therefore the government has resorted to “adjusting” the data to “prove” that Climate Change is “real.” The torturing of the actual data has gotten so bad, that they now have to go back to their “adjustments” of previous years of data and “further refine” them to maintain their lies.

39 posted on 12/01/2022 6:29:02 AM PST by Natty Bumppo@frontier.net (We are the dangerous ones, who stand between all we love and a more dangerous world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Personally, I’m a huge fan of carbon.


40 posted on 12/01/2022 6:29:46 AM PST by nascarnation (Let's go Brandon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson