The winner is Studio Weavewith Wright & Wright Architects, Webb Yates Engineers, Tom Massey Studio and Daisy Froud.The shortlist included Periscopewith Assemble; Publicawith Carmody Groarke; and EastArchitectureand Hayatsu Architects with Bradley-Hole Schoenaich Landscape.Collective Cultures comprising OMMX, AANF, Msoma Architects, YAA Projects with J&L Gibbons was also among the finalists.AdvertisementThis contest was only open to members of Lot 4 of the Greater London Authoritys Architecture + Urbanism Framework.The project is intended as a rapid, high-quality response to improve the museums arrival experience, which currently involves an open-air queuing system and a series of temporary tent-like structures for security screening. The central London museum receives more than 6 million visitors annually.The scheme is intended to serve as a precursor to a permanent project reconsidering the complexs relationship to its surrounding public realm. This is expected in a later phase of the museums ongoing regeneration masterplan.The shortlisted teams were asked to develop high-quality, flexible and sustainable proposals, with a clear end-of-life plan that will also account for the reuse of any structures erected on the site.The winning team will now work with the British Museum and local partners to develop the designs and prepare a planning application, with new pavilions expected to be in place by spring 2026.AdvertisementThe entrances competition sitesNicholas Cullinan, director of the British Museum, said: As the most visited building in the UK, and one of the top three most visited museums in the world, first impressions count. With the visitor welcome pavilions were striving to create the most inspiring greeting possible for the 6.2 million people (and counting) from across the nation and around the world who come through our doors each year whether it's their first visit or fifteenth, aged five or 95.We were very impressed by Studio Weaves initial proposals. They perfectly balance athoughtful visitor experience while remaining true to the British Museums historic building. Im delighted to be working with them, and I look forward to leading the development of the designs in consultation with the London Borough of Camden and other key stakeholders to create something very special for everyone.Je Ahn,foundingdirector of Studio Weave, said: As Londoners, and long-term visitors, we are honoured to be part of this moment in the Museums history. With the entry, our team wanted to celebrate the British Museum as both a global and a local museum, and create an internationally exemplary space that will improve the experience of Great Russell Street and Montague Place for everybody.Our proposal aims to resolve complex issues on the site. The project will preserve the appearance of the historic Grade I-listed buildings, address the changing climate and look forward to the future of the institution. It will also introduce new soft landscaping and plants, dotted with engaging installations encouraging curiosity and becoming a memorable highlight of every visit.The winner announcement comes just four months after the British Museum revealed the five design teams shortlisted to overhaul more than a third of its gallery spaces and rework behind-the-scenes areas.It also coincides with initial design exercise models and images by the shortlisted teams going on display in the Museums Round Reading Room.The exercise asked each of the teams to provide visionary approaches for the project, alongside the outline design of a limited selection of museum displays, rather than to create concept designs for the scheme as a whole.That parallel contest, which launched before the welcome experience competition and has faced controversy due to financial backing from fossil fuel giant BP, focuses on the western area of the Grade I-listed museum, which currently hosts collections of Ancient Egyptian, Greek and Roman artefacts.The job will be the museums biggest building project since the 1820s when work began on Robert Smirkes original Greek Revival-style quadrangle. The 100,000m museum has around 3,500 different rooms and features more than eight million items in its permanent collection.Three years ago, the museum named four architects on a 45 million construction consultancy services framework: Avanti Architects, Dannatt Johnson Architects, Nex Architecture and Wright & Wright Architects.Stanton Williams completed a new Albukhary Foundation Gallery of the Islamic World at the British Museum in 2019. In 2014, RSHP completed the museums World Conservation and Exhibitions Centre extension.The entrances shortlistCollective Cultures (OMMX, AANF, Msoma Architects, YAA Projects) with J&L GibbonsEastArchitectureand Hayatsu Architects with Bradley-Hole Schoenaich LandscapePeriscopewith AssemblePublicawith Carmody Groarke[WINNER] Studio Weave with Wright & Wright Architects, Webb Yates Engineers, Tom Massey Studio and Daisy Froud

The winner is GPAD, POoR Collective, MRG Studio, Sutton Vane Associates, Cundall, and MDA Consulting, with their Beyond the Bridge proposal, which aims to boost community engagement, sustainability and safety while reflecting the rich cultural identity of Wandsworth.GPAD and POoR Collective said: We are delighted to be selected to design the Transformation of Falcon Road Bridge. We know the area very well, as the team have worked with local schools and co-designed installations nearby.We are super-excited to co-design another project in Wandsworth and to include local young people, residents and community groups throughout the process. This project gives opportunity for meaningful community engagement that will help shape the design to enrich the local environment for residents and visitors alike.AdvertisementWinner: GPAD, POoR Collective, MRG Studio, Sutton Vane Associates, Cundall, and MDA ConsultingThe other finalists included Adams & Sutherland with Studio ANF, make:good and Artin Light; andre kong studio with Arup and Kanda; Assemble with Samara Scott, Flock Together, Studio Dekka, Stinsensqueeze and Momentum; and Voice B4 Vision.Also shortlisted are Alvaro Barrington with Casswell Bank Architects, Aldo Rinaldi, Our Building Design, ARUP, and Stockdale; and Flanagan Lawrence with Social Space, Arup, Expedition, Light Follows Behaviour, Mo Almedia, Mark and Theo Chaudoir.Each team received an honorarium of 1,500 to further develop their designs and present them to a public audience for consultation. All seven designs were also displayed in three local locations and online with the public invited to submit feedback.The competition invited architects, landscape architects, designers and artists to draw up concepts for the poorly lit, congested and under-maintained town centre underpass, which would transform it into a new vibrant, artistic space connecting north and south Battersea.It also aims to improve safety and accessibility, create a pleasant and joyful environment for all users of the 100m-long route, and deliver a visually striking intervention that promotes sustainable travel while celebrating local heritage and diversity.AdvertisementThe winning team will now lead the fabrication and installation of their concept, to be completed by autumn 2025 to coincide with Wandsworths year as the Mayor of Londons Borough of Culture. The budget includes an indicative 12.5 per cent to cover design fees and other management costs.LFA director Rosa Rogina said: Beyond the Bridge beautifully embodies the spirit of transformation and inclusivity that is at the heart of the London Festival of Architecture. By weaving the voices and stories of Wandsworths communities into the design, this project celebrates local identity in a deeply meaningful way.We are thrilled to see such a visionary and community-focused proposal come to life, redefining Falcon Road Bridge as a landmark of connection, creativity, and pride for all who pass through it.Simon Hogg, leader of Wandsworth Council, which is backing the scheme, said: Im delighted to welcome the winning bridge design team to Wandsworth to help us make a real difference to the Clapham Junction area and involve local people in the project.As part of our Decade of Renewal, the makeover to Falcon Road Bridge will be paid for by property developers. This new bridge design will provide a better and brighter route and create a new landmark for the borough during our year as London Borough of Culture 2025.The Falcon Road Bridge covers a 100m-long stretch of road running underneath railway tracks at the eastern end of Clapham Junction station in the heart of Battersea. Source:Image by Kes EcclestonContest site: Falcon Road Bridge, BatterseaThe competition judges included artist Helen Cammock; Anthony Dewar, professional head buildings and architecture at Network Rail; Jagdip Jagpal, art curator and chair of UP Projects; and Satu Streatfield, specialist associate, night-time and lighting at Publica.The competition comes four years after an overhaul of nearby Thessaly Road railway bridge was completed by artist and designer Yinka Ilori. His Happy Street concept won an earlier LFA contest. Emerging practice Projects Office won an LFA competition to revamp a disused railway arch in Nine Elms in 2021.The Winning Design: Beyond the BridgeWinner: GPAD, POoR Collective, MRG Studio, Sutton Vane Associates, Cundall, and MDA ConsultingBeyond the Bridge transforms the underpass into a welcoming and inspiring environment, addressing key community concerns such as safety, lighting, and noise reduction. Central to the design is the concept of community ownership:Dynamic Lighting: Responsive and artistic lighting enhances visibility and celebrates local cultural events, creating a vibrant and safe space day and night.Green Gateway: A focus on air quality and biodiversity introduces pollinator-friendly plants and accessible micro-gardens.Community Wayfinding and Art: The underpass features a 'Memories of Wandsworth' wayfinding wall, co-designed with local residents, celebrating landmarks and stories through art and dynamic murals.Acoustic Comfort: Panels integrated with artistic elements reduce noise and improve comfort for all users, including neurodivergent individuals.The shortlistAdams & Sutherland with Studio ANF, make:good and Artin Lightandre kong studio with Arup and KandaAssemble, Samara Scott, Flock Together, Studio Dekka, Stinsensqueeze, MomentumAlvaro Barrington, Casswell Bank Architects, Aldo Rinaldi, Our Building Design, ARUP, and StockdaleVoice B4 VisionFlanagan Lawrence with Social Place, Expedition, ARUP, Light Follows Behaviour, Gustafson Porter + Bowman, Mo Almedia, Mark and Theo Chaudoir[WINNER] GPAD, POoR Collective, MRG Studio, Sutton Vane Associates, Cundall, and MDA Consulting

The Chicago-based practice has submitted early drawings to the City of London Corporation for the redevelopment of 1 Silk Street, to replace an office building tucked into the north-east corner of Chamberlin, Powell and Bons celebrated Brutalist landmark.SOMs 100,000m proposal would demolish the existing 1980s office building on the 0.57ha site, formerly home to law firm Linklaters, to make way for a 21-storey office building comprising two towers.According to the scoping report, the proposed development would comprise a single building capable of being viewed as two separate east and west elements and capable of subdivision into separate tenancies. The existing substructure would be retained as the foundations of the new development.AdvertisementThe mixed-use scheme would include landscaped terraces, new public routes through the site and new open space and commercial space at ground level. Source:Google EarthExisting building at 1 Silk StreetSOMs early visualisations form part of a scoping opinion request for the site, submitted by developer Lipton Rogers on behalf of investor La Salle.The existing 1 Silk Street building currently dominating the site consists of two interlinked towers designed by Fitzroy Robinson Partnership the 17-storey Milton House to the east and 13-storey Shire House to the west featuring heavily glazed faades.The buildings were internally and externally refurbished to designs by Sheppard Robson between 1994 and 1996.The proposed redevelopment is to ensure that offices at 1 Silk Street align with new requirements that come into force next year for commercial buildings to have a minimum EPC rating of C.AdvertisementIn the scoping report, 1 Silk Street is described by environmental consultants Trium as a utilitarian office building that does not represent the best work by either firm of well-known architects associated with its construction and refurbishment.The consultants explain: Architecturally, the building is not distinguished, nor does it present an innovative approach to office design; rather, its current condition reflects the office requirements of the time of its refurbishment in the mid-1990s.The existing building is not considered to have any architectural merit, and it detracts from the streetscape as a result of the inactive frontages and lack of permeability.The proposed development seeks to improve the ground floor experience and introduce a building of higher architectural quality, explains the report.A full planning application is expected to be submitted next year and, pending approval, completion is scheduled for 2032.SOM and La Salle have been contacted for comment.

Hot off the press! Our last newsletter of the year is here.This special edition provides a trip down memory lane as we reminisce on all the incredible things our amazing DNEG and ReDefine crews have accomplished over the last 12 months.Heres a sneak peek:INSPIRING COLLABORATIONS Reminisce on our biggest releases of the year, including Dune: Part Two, The Garfield Movie and moreAWARDS AND INDUSTRY RECOGNITION Catch up on the recognition our amazing crews received in 2024 (so far!), from our Emmy award for The Last of Us to our AEAF wins for both Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga and Godzilla x Kong: The New EmpireEXCITING DEVELOPMENTS Uncover the ways we went above and beyond this year to deliver the best version of everything that we doClick to read:Thank you to our teams for another great year of movie magic! Enjoy this supercut of some of the extraordinary films and shows we were honoured to help bring to life this year:Want to stay up to date in 2025? Subscribe here! See you next year!

A federal government shutdown is looking increasingly likely as theHouse of Representatives failed to pass a short-term spending bill Thursday. The House was scrambling to approve a budget after House Republicans and President-elect Donald Trump on Wednesday said they opposed an earlier short-term spending bill that would have kept the government running into next year. "This chaos would not be happening if we had a real president,"Trump said in a statement. "We will in 32 days."Lawmakers have until the end of Friday, Dec. 20, to pass a spending bill that will fund the federal government into next spring while it hashes out the long-term federal budget. If that deadline passes without Congress approving funding, the government will enter into a shutdown period until one is passed, during which time federal employees will be furloughed without pay and certain government services will cease to operate.The US government has been shut down 10 times in its long history, the first one coming in late 1981. The most recent shutdown started in December 2018 and was arguably the most significant of them all, lasting a record 35 days. While the government hasn't shut down since then, the threat of one has become increasingly more common in recent years whenever funding deadlines approach.Should a shutdown occur to close out 2024, you can expect some vital services to persist while others stall. You can read on for all the details. For more, find out how to protect your Social Security number from thieves and how long you have left to sign up for ACA health insurance.Will I still get Social Security during a government shutdown? Upgrade your inbox Get cnet insider From talking fridges to iPhones, our experts are here to help make the world a little less complicated. The Social Security Administration has plans in place to ensure that Social Security checks will still be sent out in the event of a government shutdown. This applies for Social Security benefits as well as Supplemental Security Income and Social Security Disability Insurance.You could, however, expect to see delays for other Social Security Administration services, including the issuance of new Social Security cards and appointments for benefit applications, as well as responses to requests for customer service. Other things like benefit verifications and processing overpayments will stop entirely.Will I still get Medicare during a government shutdown?Just like with Social Security, you can expect to continue receiving benefits during a government shutdown if you have Medicare or Medicaid. According to a rundown posted by the office of Virginia Rep. Jennifer Wexton, these benefits, however, could cease in the event that a shutdown lasted longer than three months, but such a possibility is considerably outside the realm of historical precedent.Will a government shutdown impact federal nutrition programs?Food assistance programs are at a significant risk of losing funding in the event of a government shutdown. If you're among the tens of millions of Americans who participate in programs like the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, your benefits could run out shortly after the start of a shutdown. The Department of Agriculture is also authorized to send out SNAP benefits for only 30 days from the start of a shutdown, funding or no.Will a government shutdown impact air travel?Federal employees in this field are still expected to work during a shutdown despite the fact that they will not be paid during it, so you will most likely not see an immediate impact on air travel. This includes air traffic controllers, Transportation Security Administration officers, and Customs and Border Protection agents.However, according to Rep. Wexton's breakdown of government shutdowns, it isn't unheard of for these employees to not show up during a government shutdown, which can result in the flow of travel at airports being heavily delayed.What is keeping Congress from approving a short-term budgetOn Wednesday, Trump came out against a proposed budget resolution that looked to have enough support to pass the House, demanding that it be reworked to either raise the debt limit or abolish it entirely,writing in a joint statement with Vice President-Elect JD Vancethat "anything else is a betrayal of our country." GOP support of the resolution in Congress stalled as Trump suggested that any who supported it would be targeted in future primary elections.The debt limit imposes a cap on how much debt the US Treasury can take on, which largely impacts how much it can borrow to pay down obligations. The limit was previously raised during funding negotiations in 2023 and raising it again was not initially part of negotiations."GOP extremists want House Democrats to raise the debt ceiling so that House Republicans can lower the amount of your Social Security check, Hard pass," House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries saidin a statement posted to Bluesky.For more, find out what sort of changes could be on the way for Medicare in 2025.

Internet in Jersey City is somewhat limited with just a few providers available. However, residents can still get access to multigig internet speeds.

Our Experts Written by Giselle Castro-Sloboda, Medically Reviewed Our expert, award-winning staff selects the products we cover and rigorously researches and tests our top picks. If you buy through our links, we may get a commission. Reviews ethics statement Why You Can Trust CNET 16171819202122232425+ Years of Experience 14151617181920212223 Hands-on Product Reviewers 6,0007,0008,0009,00010,00011,00012,00013,00014,00015,000 Sq. Feet of Lab Space How we test CNETs expert staff reviews and rates dozens of new products and services each month, building on more than a quarter century of expertise.Table of Contents What to consider Price The right smart scale for you will include the most features you want at the right price for your budget. Weight capacity Be sure to check the smart scale's weight capacity to ensure it can handle your weight. App compatibility If you already use a fitness app, be sure that the smart scale is compatible with it. Body image If you struggle with body image, consult with your doctor to find the best option for you. Some scales come with the option to hide your weight. Connectivity Determine if you'd like your smart scale to connect to Wi-Fi, Bluetooth or both. User-friendly interface You want a smart scale that has an interface that's easy to read and follow. Especially if there will be multiple users. Durability Choose a smart scale that is long-lasting and can handle multiple recharges or battery changes. Privacy policy If privacy is of concern, make sure you read the privacy policy of the smart scale you plan to purchase first. Battery life Whether you're going to use the scale often or occasionally, you want a smart scale with decent battery life that doesn't require constant recharging. Our Picks Most customizable smart scale Wyze Scale X View details $40 at Amazon View details Accurate body composition smart scale Sponsored - Oxiline Scale X Pro View details $100 at Oxiline View details Best smart scale with user-friendly app Renpho Smart Wi-Fi Bluetooth Body Fat Scale-Premium View details $43 at Renpho View details Best smart scale display screen Etekcity HR Smart Fitness Scale View details $68 at Amazon View details Best smart scale with basic readings Greater Goods Premium Wi-Fi Scale View details $27 at Amazon View details Smart scale with the most third-party app connections Withings Body Plus View details $100 at Withings View details Best smart scale for unlimited users Eufy Smart Scale P2 Pro View details $80 at Amazon View details Best smart scale for athletes Sportneer Smart Scale View details $70 at Sportneer View details FITNESS TRACKER DEALS OF THE WEEK Apple Watch Series 10 (GPS, 42mm, Black, S/M 130-180mm, Sports Band): $349 (save $50) Samsung Galaxy Watch 7 (Bluetooth, 44mm, Green): $243 (save $88) Garmin Instinct 2 Solar GPS Smartwatch (Graphite): $300 (save $100) Amazfit Bip 5 GPS Smartwatch (Black): $70 (save $20) Samsung Galaxy Watch 6 (Bluetooth 44mm, Graphite): $170 (save $160) Deals are selected by the CNET Group commerce team, and may be unrelated to this article. Table of Contents

OpinionDecember 19, 20245 min readThe UnitedHealthcare Tragedy Is Why Insurance Needs to Change NowI am a trauma surgeon and gunshot survivor who has experienced byzantine health insurance coverage firsthand. I understand why people are furiousBy Joseph V. Sakran edited by Megha Satyanarayana Fanatic Studio/Alamy Stock PhotoWhen I was 17 I was nearly killed when a fight broke out after a high school football game and someone fired a gun. A stray bullet struck my throat, tearing through my trachea and damaging my carotid artery.This near-death experience deeply traumatized my entire family. Yet my parents couldnt focus solely on my survival and healing. In the hospital, they were overwhelmed by a labyrinth of paperwork, billing inquiries and questions about insurance coverage. Even after I was discharged, the challenges continued. Instead of focusing on my recovery, we spent our energy addressing delayed approvals for follow-up care, denied access to physical therapy and endless requests to clarify reimbursements.Our health insurance system made a catastrophic time for me and my parents needlessly worse. Now, as a trauma surgeon, I have seen how pervasive such struggles are. And with the killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, long-simmering and widespread anger about the harm that health insurers have caused seems to be reaching a boiling point. After decades of public outcry over health care policies that prioritize profits over peoplepolicies that deny lifesaving treatments, cause bankruptcy over uncovered medical treatments, and leave entire communities behindthe demand for reform is growing too loud to ignore. For too many, health insurance is a brick walla bureaucratic gatekeeper that creates barriers instead of providing solutions.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.We cannot justify his killing; so how do we channel our collective grief and frustration into meaningful change? How do we build a health care system that offers healing, not harma system that values human life over corporate gain? It will take courage, accountability, and a willingness to reimagine a system where patients are seen as people, not as financial transactions.The average annual cost of health care in the U.S. is estimated at a staggering $15,074 per person.41 percent of Americans carry medical debt, highlighting the systems profound failure to provide financial security when its needed most.On top of these ruinous costswhich patients rarely know up front and have little time to understand during medical emergenciesinsurers also decide whether they will pay for care, regardless of whether a patients doctor says such care is necessary. The delay of care through bureaucratic hurdles like prior authorizations and denied claims are carefully designed to force people and their doctors to fight their way through outdated systems like fax machines and endless phone trees to ask for appeals or reconsideration of denied treatments or examinations. All too often the mental effort and excessive time required to navigate claims, denials and appeals wears people down, leading them to simply give up on getting the coverage they are owed. This isnt just inefficiency; its a predatory failure of empathy for people during their most vulnerable moments. And it perversely exacerbates anxiety and depression for the sick person and their caregivers alike, compounding the very challenges the system is meant to address.Ive spent countless nights fighting to save lives in operating rooms. Ive witnessed how gun violence intersects with healthcare inequities, leaving families to confront not only grief but insurmountable medical bills. Survivors often endure years of physical and financial pain as they battle not only their injuries but also insurance denials for necessary care. I know firsthand what my patients go through. Every step of my own recovery felt like a negotiationnot just for my health but for access to the care I needed. At times, I questioned whether I was viewed as a patient or a cost to be managed. These frustrations extended to my family, who bore the emotional and logistical burden of dealing with appeals and authorizations while supporting my recovery.For many, financial strain forces impossible choices: families forgo optimal treatments or rehabilitation plansnot for lack of understanding but because they simply cant afford them. These compromises lead to worse patient outcomes (and even greater systemic costs), compounding suffering that could have been prevented with proper access to care. Too often, hope is eroded by a system more focused on profits than well-being.To fix this system, we need to radically reconsider the principles of care, equity, accountability and cost that underpin it. Addressing cost is essential; it threatens the stability of our health care system, and the financial burden should not fall disproportionately on people needing health care and their families.Our policy decisions must reflect our values, and so we must ask ourselves: Are we ready to expand coverage so that every American has access to affordable, high-quality care? Can we accept higher premiums or shared costs to build a system that guarantees subsidies for those who need them most and still prevents unnecessary or wasteful medicine? Beyond coverage, we must simplify and streamline processes, eliminating the unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles that overwhelm patients and families. Equity must be a core pillarnot just in access but in the quality of care delivered and the financial protections offered.Mental health must be integrated and prioritized alongside physical health in care and coverage, recognizing the minds essential role in bodily recovery and overall well-being. Excessive profits in the insurance industry, rising drug costs and opaque billing practices demand accountability and shared responsibility among providers, insurers, pharmaceutical companies and policy makers. And finally, insurers and clinicians alike must be held accountablenot for short-term cost-cutting, but for improving outcomes, delivering compassionate care and ensuring within reason that no patients health journey leads to financial devastation. If we are serious about building a system that values human dignity over profit, these reforms are not just necessary; they are long overdue.With Donald Trump returning to the presidency, and Republican majorities in both the House and Senate, the likelihood of such sweeping health care reform over the next four years becomes more limited, particularly in expanding access through government programs. The focus will instead likely shift even further toward deregulation, market-driven solutions and reducing government involvement in health care, rather than pursuing universal coverage or expanding subsidies. Efforts to repeal or further weaken provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) are likely to resurface, along with predatory policies promoting short-term health plans and inefficient state-level control over Medicaid.While reducing prescription drug costs may remain a bipartisan goal, broader reforms aimed at equity, simplicity and the expansion of mental health care may stall unless they align with cost-reduction strategies. The challenge will be ensuring that patient needsespecially for the most vulnerableare not sidelined amid policies that prioritize fiscal conservatism and market efficiencies over systemic change.We urgently need to create a more equitable system. Insurers must cap out-of-pocket expenses, eliminate lifetime limits and expand income-based assistance, so afflicted Americans can focus on healing and recovery.My own frustrations with the system shaped my resolve to drive positive change. This moment demands difficult reforms and introspection, but it also offers an opportunity for transformation. Our health care system should inspire hope, not compound suffering. Patients, clinicians, policymakers, and insurers must come together to prioritize care over complexity, outcomes over optics, and people over profit.This is an opinion and analysis article, and the views expressed by the author or authors are not necessarily those of Scientific American.

December 19, 20245 min readBiden Pledges Huge Climate Emissions Cuts HeCantEnforce.Heres Why It Still MattersPresident Biden strengthened the U.S.s commitment to slash climate pollution under the Paris Agreement knowing that President-elect Donald Trump could abandon it, but states and cities could still use it as a guidePresident Joe Biden strengthened U.S. commitments to lower climate pollution Thursday. Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty ImagesCLIMATEWIRE | President Joe Biden announced Thursday that he will strengthen the United States climate target by aiming to cut planet-warming pollution 61-66 percent by 2035, in a move that his successor is certain to disregard.The new goal marks an increase over Bidens 2021 pledge to slash greenhouse gases 50-52 percent by 2030 over 2005 levels, but is a downgrade from what modelers say would have been possible under a future president who acts aggressively to slow rising temperatures.President-elect Donald Trump has indicated the opposite.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.Instead, the target will likely be jettisoned after Trump takes office, reflecting his promises to expand fossil fuel production and dismantle Bidens climate agenda.Though the incoming administration could just ignore the target, the goal offers an ambitious marker that states, cities and businesses can aspire to meet, even as the Trump presidency attempts to roll back federal climate programs.President Biden's new 2035 climate goal is both a reflection of what we've already accomplished and what we believe the United States can and should achieve in the future, said John Podesta, senior White House adviser for international climate policy, in a call with reporters.The move comes amid increasing pressure on the Biden administration to make urgent environmental commitments in the waning days of the presidents term, even if Trump has no intention of honoring them. U.S. officials say it sends an important signal to the world of what the U.S. could do in the face of those challenges.American industry will keep inventing and keep investing. State, local and tribal governments will keep stepping up, Biden said in prerecorded video remarks for the announcement.It also includes at least a 35 percent reduction of methane, a short-lived but potent greenhouse gas that the Biden administration has prioritized tackling through regulations and global agreements.We're looking to governors, mayors, business leaders and more to carry this important work forward, said Podesta.The targets known as nationally determined contributions, or NDCs are required under the Paris Agreement, the global deal to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius in the postindustrial era. The White House said that it is formally submitting the new target to the United Nations climate change secretariat. Trump is expected to withdraw from the agreement.'A North Star'Observers argued that the new target showcases the ability of the worlds largest economy to tackle climate change without federal help.The 2035 climate target can serve as a North Star for states, cities and corporations that are committed to climate action, Manish Bapna, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, said in a statement.Other advocates echoed that sentiment, saying it could help guide federal policy after 2028 or whenever a climate-focused president takes office.The 2035 emissions reduction target is at the lower bound of what the science demands, and yet it is close to the upper bound of what is realistic if nearly every available policy lever were pulled, said Debbie Weyl, acting U.S. director at the World Resources Institute.A fact sheet released with the announcement said the cuts to climate pollution could be achieved through a combination of surviving Biden-era policies; stronger state and local action; and technology advancements such as cheaper wind and solar energy, nuclear power and grid upgrades.But reaching those marks will not be easy.A bipartisan push in Congress to ease permitting rules, which could speed renewable energy installations, hasnt panned out. The Biden administration approved Californias plan to phase out gas-powered cars by 2035 on Wednesday, but Trump has threatened to roll it back.Members of the U.S. Climate Alliance, a coalition of mostly Democratic states, are on track to lower greenhouse gases 26 to 28 percent by next year but the U.S. is off track to meet Bidens initial goal to slash emissions in half five years from now.No one's hiding the ball on that. Our analysis is very clear that additional action is needed to achieve our 2030 target, but that there is a clear pathway to do so, said Casey Katims, executive director of the U.S. Climate Alliance.Hitting the new target will also depend on investments from the private sector. The clean energy tax breaks in Bidens signature climate law, the Inflation Reduction Act, have unleashed billions of dollars for clean energy manufacturing across the U.S.Yet many of those policies are threatened by Trump and congressional Republicans, who have taken aim at government rebates used to lower the cost of buying electric cars and other clean energy incentives.Even discussion of repeal and tweaks or cuts have a chilling effect and delay and reduce the pace and scale of investment, said Zach Friedman, senior director of federal policy at Ceres, a business sustainability group. Tweaks to tax credits, timelines, restrictions, etc., has big implications for the amount of investment that comes back to American communities.Aiming highBefore the election, modeling from the University of Marylands Center for Global Sustainability showed that the U.S. could achieve emissions cuts of 65-67 percent by 2035. Studies by other groups showed a similar range.That would put the country on a trajectory to zero out emissions by 2050. But achieving that target relies on additional action at the federal, state and city level.An updated policy brief released this week by the Center for Global Sustainability assumes cuts of 54-62 percent based on no further federal action, but more at the state level.Senior administration officials who held a call with reporters to preview the announcement said such analyses show that its possible to cut pollution without aggressive federal action though they acknowledged that it would be harder.The pace is of course an issue, one official said.Robbie Orvis, senior director of modeling and analysis at Energy Innovation, said, Hitting the proposed target would definitely require states to strengthen and pass policy across many states at a level we haven't seen before.Other analyses looked at some potential worst-case scenarios.Energy Innovation estimated that the U.S. emissions would fall by just 36 percent by 2035 if the Inflation Reduction Act is fully repealed. The Rhodium Group predicted a range of 24-40 percent cuts based on rollbacks of federal climate regulations and a total repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act. Neither analysis accounts for additional action at the state level.Analysts say its unlikely that the Inflation Reduction Act will be completely unraveled, particularly as its benefits expand nationwide.But even with the Inflation Reduction Act, the U.S. is still short of reaching its 2030 goal of cutting emissions 50-52 percent Bidens original target. A July analysis by the Rhodium Group found the U.S. is on track to cut 32-43 percent of its climate pollution by 2030, putting it on a path to 38-56 percent cuts by 2035.Biden was laying down a marker with the new target, said Alden Meyer, a senior associate at the environmental think tank E3G.Everyone understands its going to be very hard to meet this target, given Trump will take us off the field for the next four years, Meyer said. But they understand it for what it is what the U.S. should be doing.Reprinted from E&E News with permission from POLITICO, LLC. Copyright 2024. E&E News provides essential news for energy and environment professionals.

OpinionDecember 19, 20244 min readTrumps Pick for NIH Director Could Harm Science and People's HealthWith a possible bird flu outbreak looming, Donald Trumps choice of Jay Bhattacharya, a scientist critical of COVID policies, for the NIH is the wrong move for science and public healthBy Steven M. Albert edited by Tanya LewisJay Bhattacharya speaks during a roundtable discussion with members of the House Freedom Caucus on the COVID-19 pandemic at The Heritage Foundation on Thursday, November 10, 2022. Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty ImagesPresident-elect Donald Trump wants Jay Bhattacharya, a physician-scientist and economist at Stanford University, to lead the National Institutes of Health. The NIH is a global powerhouse of science. Its mission is to seek fundamental knowledge about the nature and behavior of living systems and the application of that knowledge to enhance health, lengthen life, and reduce illness and disability.Most politicians, even when criticizing the agency, recognize the good it has done in building effective public health measures. Cancer death rates continue to decline, for example, because of the work NIH investigators have done around prevention, detection and treatment.Bhattacharya does not see the agencys successes this way. In his podcast Science from the Fringe, Bhattacharya recently said he is amazed by the authoritarian tendencies of public health. He struck a similar theme in a Newsmax interview: [We need] to turn the NIH from something thats [used] to control society into something thats aimed at the discovery of truth to improve the health of Americans."On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.The scientists who apply for NIH funding, sit on peer review panels and administer grants would be surprised to hear they control society. They do science. The claims of authoritarianism are a screen for pushing a particular agenda that is likely to damage the NIH. Bhattacharyas science agenda is political: to set concerns for personal autonomy against evidence-based public health science. This is not appropriate for NIH leadership.Bhattacharya has never explained how the NIH controls society, given its role as a research institution, and it is hard to see how it does except perhaps in setting research priorities and awarding funding based on expert review. Is he against public health legislation that has controlled lead emissions in vehicles, enforced vaccine requirements for children attending public schools, and promoted folate fortification in bread and fluoride in drinking water? This legislation has improved population health in terms of cognitive performance, infectious disease burden, neural tube defects in pregnancy, and oral health, respectively. Is this the kind of control he fears?Public health authorities decide on a health promotion measure for a population based on the science, often for people vulnerable and unaware of health risks, when health benefits are clear. NIH research provides the evidence for these public health measures. It is fair to debate the quality of scientific evidence and benefit to population health relative to restrictions on autonomy and choice, but establishing mechanisms for population health risk and making recommendations based on this evidence are not authoritarianism, and making such a comparison is not the way to do good science or build trust.Bhattacharyas views are one more unfortunate legacy of the COVID pandemic, when he argued against supposed public health overreach in the Great Barrington Declaration back in 2020. The declaration claimed that isolating only people at highest risk and allowing continued spread of COVID among more healthy people would build herd immunity without substantial increases in COVID mortality. In response, public health officials and NIH leaders criticized Bhattacharya based on the science: In the setting of asymptomatic viral transmission, high contagiousness and inescapable population mixing, such a strategy of focused protection was unlikely to protect vulnerable populations. Bhattacharya called this censorship and unsuccessfully tried to convince the Supreme Court to weigh in against social media venues that dropped his messaging.This personal pique is a distraction and should not obscure the central focus of U.S. public health policy during the pandemic. Science supported school closures, work-from-home policies, large gathering restrictions in public spaces, and face mask requirements as effective ways to lower hospital surges and buy time for vaccine development. You can challenge the science, as many have; but it is not authoritarian to use science for policy. Likewise, you may value personal autonomy and resist vaccination or face mask mandates, but drawing on scientific evidence to support these measures does not mean scientists have engaged in censorship, data manipulation, and misinformation, as Trump has falsely claimed to justify his nominees.Authoritarianism in science or public health was not responsible for the pandemics heavy toll in the U.S. Structural factors such as income inequality and access to health care were the key drivers of COVID mortality. To prepare the country for the next pandemic as NIH director, it would be far more effective to invest in pandemic preparedness and infectious disease research and, beyond that, to ensure everyone has access to health care.Indeed, the proposed remedies for making science less authoritarian, such as shifting NIH grant funding to states in the form of block grants (recommended by the conservative policy agenda Project 2025), will not promote nonauthoritarian public health but will almost certainly degrade the quality of American science. Will states be able to match the NIH peer review system, which is regarded worldwide as the exemplar of transparent, confidential, impartial evaluation based on merit and scientific consensus? It is hard to imagine how a decentralized state-level effort would produce a more fair review or science with greater impact. Will scientists in some states be barred from funding for research on family planning or womens health, for example?We dont know what other policies Bhattacharya might propose. Banning viral gain-of-function research? Eliminating research involving fetal tissue and restricting studies using animal models? Shifting funding away from infectious disease research, as RFK, Jr., Trumps pick to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, has proposed? Giving peer review panels less influence in determining scientific merit?The best way to depoliticize science, if that is your concern, is to get out of the way and let scientific inquiry drive investigation and peer review determine priority for funding. The authoritarianism Bhattacharya rails against is often just the application of science to improve population health. Pitting personal autonomy against the application of science to policy is fine for vanity webcasts and think tanks, but inappropriate for NIH leadership. If he would rather focus on promoting personal autonomy in pandemic policy, perhaps he is being nominated to the wrong agency. Bhattacharya is not what the NIH needs.This is an opinion and analysis article, and the views expressed by the author or authors are not necessarily those of Scientific American.