Cold War treaties aren’t sufficient for the era of asteroid mining

Why did I, a physics/astronomy journalist, write about asteroids for a deep-sea mining trade magazine? Read on! Oh yes, and pledge to my book of science comics with Maki Naro, Who Owns an Asteroid?

[ This blog is dedicated to tracking my most recent publications. Subscribe to the feed to keep up with all the science stories I write! ]

The World Is Not Ready for Asteroid Mining, But It Needs To Be

For Deep Sea Mining Observer:

Nothing is less “deep sea” than an asteroid, yet parallels exist between these two domains, particularly when it comes to resource extraction. Asteroids are debris left over from the formation of the Solar System roughly 4.5 billion years ago. Due to our shared origin, Earth and asteroids contain the same basic materials: water, carbon compounds,  metals, and so forth. The “metals and so forth” part has drawn the interest of nations and private companies, since many asteroids are potentially rich in gold, platinum, and rare-earth elements. Astronomers have identified 957,798 asteroids as of December 2019, of which about 10,000 are known to orbit close enough to our planet to be classified as near-Earth objects — with some reachable by spacecraft.

With no biosphere, ecosystem services, or local stakeholders, extracting materials from asteroids carries few of the environmental concerns present in terrestrial or ocean mining on Earth.

Both the deep ocean and outer space are governed by international law, with much of said law constructed during the Cold War. Interested parties often bring a certain Wild West mentality to resource extraction in both instances. However, space law lags behind terrestrial laws on a number of fronts, and recent moves by individual nations and companies should be seen as a wake-up call.

[read the rest at DSM Observer…]

Fighting racial gerrymandering with math

The linked article is for SIAM News, the magazine for members of the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM). The audience for this magazine, in other words, is professional mathematicians and related researchers working in a wide variety of fields. While this article contains equations, I wrote it to be understandable even if you gloss over the math.

[ This blog is dedicated to tracking my most recent publications. Subscribe to the feed to keep up with all the science stories I write! ]

The Mathematical Fight for Voting Rights

For SIAM News:

State and local governments will redraw voting districts based on new information following completion of the 2020 U.S. Census. Ideally, this process ensures fair representation. In practice, however, districting often involves gerrymandering: the deliberate planning of districts to dilute the voting power of certain groups in favor of others, which violates the law.

Racial gerrymandering—drawing districts to limit the power of voters of color to select candidates they favor—is a particularly pernicious problem. Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) of 1965 specifically prohibits this practice, but that has not stopped authorities from doing it anyway. “A number of court decisions have purposefully asked mathematicians, political scientists, and statisticians to use specific methods to try and understand racial gerrymandering,” Matt Barreto, a professor of political science and Chicana/o studies at the University of California, Los Angeles, said.

Barreto and his colleagues employ powerful statistical methods and draw on census and other public data to identify gerrymandered districts. Utilizing these tools, mathematicians can test proposed district maps or draw their own, designing them from the ground up to prevent voter dilution.

[Read the rest at SIAM News…]