Category: Uncategorized

  • Rudd takes hard line on foreign investment in land

    Who “won” or “lost” tonight’s debate – and opinion was divided – was less important that what new was said by Kevin Rudd. Most notably, Rudd seemed to significantly toughen the government line on foreign investment in Australian land. He also appeared open discussion on a more liberal approach on access…

    K5fnctkf-1377697662
    Kevin Rudd and Tony Abbott stayed after the forum to talk further with the audience. AAP/Lukas Coch

    Who “won” or “lost” tonight’s debate – and opinion was divided – was less important that what new was said by Kevin Rudd.

    Most notably, Rudd seemed to significantly toughen the government line on foreign investment in Australian land.

    He also appeared open discussion on a more liberal approach on access by people before their retirement to their superannuation.

    Foreign investment is a sensitive area – for the economy, relations with other countries and domestic politics.

    There have been tensions within the Coalition, where opinion ranges from very “dry” open go Liberals to some Nationals who’d like a much more restrictive policy.

    Tonight Rudd was sounding rather like Barnaby Joyce when asked about protecting Australian land from foreign buy ups.

    “I’m a bit old-fashioned on these questions and I’m not quite as free market as Tony … maybe it’s because I grew up on a farm,” he said.

    He went on to suggest that if undeveloped agricultural land needed a lot more investment, the best way would be a joint venture – approach, comprising equity from farmers, perhaps through co-operatives, with domestic or some external investment.

    “I am a bit nervous, a bit anxious, frankly about simply an open slather on this.

    “What would our policy approach be? I am looking very carefully at how this affects the overall balance of ownership in Australia. I’m thinking particularly of our agricultural sector, but the impact in certain cities also of these sorts of acquisitions.

    “We often get criticised for trying to be protective. I actually look around the world and I see many many countries being equally protective of their own core assets.

    “We need to take a more cautious approach to this in the future without throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and I think [with] rural lands and the development of places across northern Australia to boost our agricultural exports we need a better joint venture approach.”

    This taps into what has been a very live political issue especially in regional areas. But it did also seemed policy out of nowhere.

    At another point he sounded like he was channelling his good friend Bob Katter, as he sympathised with farmers who had told him they were getting squeezed in selling their produce by Coles and Woolworths.

    “I’m now worried about that big-time and, therefore, what we’ve got to look at if we are returned … is how we provide better guarantees for proper competitive conduct out there so that the man and woman on the land is not actually having to carry the can for everything.”

    Asked about people getting access to some of their superannuation for buying houses to live in (if young) or investment (pre-retirement), Rudd also moved into some new territory. He ruled this out for the young but said “for older folk, we need to look at how people can gain access to funds earlier, which is their money.”

    By his comments on foreign investment especially Rudd has opened new fronts of policy debate for the latter stage of this campaign. It’s unclear whether this was his intention.

    His remarks will be scrutinised in China and domestically he will be pressed for more detail. Obvious questions arise – such as, did he consult colleagues about hardening the government’s position?

    It does seem strange to announce this in the debate forum. It was not like his deliberate strategy in the initial debate of dropping his plan for a gay marriage bill in the first hundred days. This appeared more a case that the question happened to tap into what was in his head.

    The audience of undecided voters scored the debate 45 to 38 to Rudd. This encounter lacked the liveliness of the Brisbane forum; there were a few barbs but no “does this guy ever shut up?” moment. Rudd made a point of saying he would stay to talk to people (because that worked for Abbott last time). No doubt he was very nice to the make-up woman.

    Rudd seemed more animated than Abbott. He kept his cool during some critical questions, notably one about his destabilising Julia Gillard’s leadership. When challenged on his proposal to relocate ships from Garden Island he declared “I don’t apologise for being in the vision business.”

    He repeatedly hammered Abbott about his paid parental leave scheme, and pushed the opposition leader on why he would not release his policy costings and budget bottom line then and there.

    Both leaders pledged to keep all their promises – an undertaking that the winner will inevitably break.

    Abbott batted through in a night-watchman sort of style. He didn’t radiate any sense of excitement and had a lot of same-old, same-old lines (ending carbon tax, stopping boats etc), although he did say the Coalition was not planning to shut any Medicare Locals, a guarantee he declined to give a few days ago.

    But they won’t be raising eyebrows in Beijing or anywhere else about what he said and he didn’t open up any big new questions for the morning. And he’d rate that as a very satisfactory outcome.

  • Vote Compass: Majority of voters back gay marriage

    Vote Compass: Majority of voters back gay marriage

    Updated 32 minutes ago

    A majority of Australians support gay marriage but clear divisions emerge along ideological lines, according to data from the ABC’s Vote Compass policy tool.

    Fifty-two per cent of respondents do not believe marriage should only be between a man and a woman, compared to 36 per cent who do. Twelve per cent selected ‘neutral’.

    Among people who identify themselves as right-leaning politically, 72 per cent think marriage should only be between a man and a woman. For the left-leaning, 78 per cent disagree with that proposition.

    Women and single voters are more likely to support gay marriage than men and people who are married.

    Vote Compass asked for views on the statement: Marriage should only be between a man and a woman.

    OverallVote IntentionIdeologyGenderAgeMarriageReligionStateRural vs Urban

    OverallStrongly AgreeSomewhat AgreeNeutralSomewhat DisagreeStrongly Disagree

    Euthanasia

    In other Vote Compass figures out today, 75 per cent of respondents backed legalising voluntary euthanasia for the terminally ill.

    Vote Compass asked for views on the statement: Terminally ill patients should be able to legally end their own lives with medical assistance.

    OverallVote IntentionIdeologyGenderAgeMarriageReligionStateRural vs Urban

    OverallStrongly AgreeSomewhat AgreeNeutralSomewhat DisagreeStrongly Disagree

    Abortion

    A strong majority of Australians want abortion services to remain at least as accessible as they currently are in Australia, the data suggests.

    Vote Compass asked: How accessible should abortion services be in Australia?

    OverallVote IntentionIdeologyGenderAgeMarriageReligionStateRural vs Urban

    OverallMuch MoreSomewhat MoreAbout the same as nowSomewhat LessMuch Less

    FAQ

    What is this?

    When Prime Minister Kevin Rudd called the federal election for September 7, the ABC immediately launched Vote Compass.

    Since then, we have received more than 900,000 responses, as people used the tool to see how their views compare to the parties’ policies.

    Between now and election day, the ABC will reveal weighted data gathered using the application.

    This report explores how people responded to questions on gay marriage, euthanasia and abortion.

    The data has been weighted by gender, age, education, enrolment as a student, religion, marital status, industry and state using the latest population estimates to be a true representation of opinion at the time of the field, resulting in an effective sample size of 422,403 respondents.

    Vote Compass is not a random sample. Why are the results being represented as though it is a poll?

    Vote Compass is not a poll. It is primarily and fundamentally an educational tool intended to promote electoral literacy and stimulate public engagement in the policy aspect of election campaigns.

    That said, respondents’ views as expressed through Vote Compass can add a meaningful dimension to our understanding of public attitudes and an innovative new medium for self-expression. Ensuring that the public has a decipherable voice in the affairs of government is a critical function of a robust democracy.

    Online surveys are inherently prone to selection bias but statisticians have long been able to correct for this (given the availability of certain variables) by drawing on population estimates such as Census micro-data.

    We apply sophisticated weighting techniques to the data to control for the selection effects of the sample, thus enabling us to make statistical inferences about the Australian population with a high degree of confidence.

    The Vote Compass data sample was weighted on the basis of: gender; age; education; students; religion; marital status.

    How can you stop people from trying to game the system?

    There are multiple safeguards in place to ensure the authenticity of each record in the dataset.

    Vote Compass does not make its protocols in this regard public so as not to aid those that might attempt to exploit the system, but among standard safeguards such as IP address logging and cookie tracking, it also uses time codes and a series of other measures to prevent users from gaming the system.

    Want to know more?

    Try it yourself

    Topics: federal-elections, federal-government, sexuality, marriage, abortion, euthanasia, australia

    First posted 3 hours 1 minute ago

  • Foreign ownership of land

    You are here

    Foreign ownership of land

    In an age of food insecurity, Australia needs to accurately track foreign ownership of agricultural land and make sure it’s in the national interest.

    What you need to know

    • Multinational corporations and foreign governments have begun investing heavily in agricultural land and water.
    • Other countries like the USA, New Zealand and Brazil have greater scrutiny on foreign land ownership, but Australia’s laws are lax.
    • Foreign investment is important for Australia, but in an age of global warming and food insecurity Australians need to track purchases of our food-producing land and water, and for us to make sure that those purchases are in the national interest.
    • The Greens will create a register of foreign ownership of agricultural land and water assets to continuously track overseas purchases.
    • We will lower the threshold from $248 million to $5 million for consideration of the national interest by the Foreign Investment Review Board for purchases of agricultural land and water by a foreign private entity, including cumulative purchases.
    • We will legislate a stronger national interest test to be applied by the Foreign Investment Review Board for purchases of agricultural land and water resources.
    • We will ban the purchase of agricultural land and water by wholly owned subsidiaries of foreign governments.

    > CARING FOR OUR FOOD SECURITY

    Australia does not accurately track foreign ownership of agricultural land and water and the threshold for considering the national interest for such purchases is far too high. It’s time to restore balance and look after our national interest.

    For Australia to be able to make informed and strategic decisions about our agricultural land and water resources, we must accurately track and consider each bid by foreign investors, particularly sovereign nations, to own it.

    The Australian Greens will:

    • Create a register of foreign ownership of agricultural land and water assets to continuously track overseas purchases.
    • Lower the threshold from $248 million to $5 million for consideration of the national interest by the Foreign Investment Review Board for purchases of agricultural land and water by a foreign private entity. This will include cumulative purchases by the same entity under the $5 million threshold.
    • Legislate a stronger national interest test to be applied by the Foreign Investment Review board for purchases of agricultural land and water resources.
    • Prohibit the purchase of agricultural land and water by wholly owned subsidiaries of foreign governments.

    > THE GLOBAL CONTEXT

    Increasingly countries that rely on imports to feed their people are buying land and water in other nations to grow food, as they are concerned about the impacts of climate change on food availability and price.

    Multinational corporations have also realised the value of agricultural land and water and have begun investing heavily in these assets across the world as they can see there will be large profits to be made if they control the means of producing food.

    As a country with a strong agricultural sector, Australia is one of the countries attracting the interest of foreign buyers. Yet laws on foreign investment in agricultural land and water are lax and we don’t keep accurate records to track levels of foreign ownership.

    Only purchases of more than a staggering $248 million are subject to a national interest test by the Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB). On top of that, the FIRB is not required to take into account cumulative purchases by the same foreign entity that combined comprise $248 million or more.

    While foreign investment is important for Australia, it is critical that we have much clearer information, and a stronger national interest is applied to the purchase of such vital assets as our agricultural land and water, particularly in a time of global food insecurity.

    Other countries with significant agricultural assets including the USA, New Zealand, Argentina, China and Brazil have all placed restrictions and greater levels of scrutiny on foreign purchase of land.

    The Greens will restore balance to the consideration of foreign investment in our land and water.

    > OTHER PARTIES

    The ALP has said it will introduce a register of foreign ownership of land and water, but failed to support Greens legislation to lower the threshold for consideration by the FIRB to $5 million and the introduction of a legislated national interest test for foreign purchase of agricultural land.

    The Coalition also failed to support the Greens bill and instead released a discussion paper. They have yet to release their policy.

    The Katter Party has an extreme position of prohibiting any foreign entity from owning more than four hectares of agricultural land.

    The Australian Greens are also standing up for stronger competition policy and have released a comprehensive plan for our Food Future.

  • Medicare and Mental Health: where do the major parties stand?

    Medicare and Mental Health: where do the major parties stand?

    Inbox
    x
    Dr Ben Mullings <mail@change.org>
    11:04 PM (5 minutes ago)

    to me

    Dear supporters,

    With only weeks to go before the election, both major parties have had next to nothing to say about improving access to mental health care. Yesterday the Greens stepped forward with their position on mental health, calling on more sessions of psychological care to be made available to those who need them.

    Earlier today, the Chair of the Australian Mental Health Commission (AMHC) and the Chair of the Mental Health Council of Australia both called on our politicians to recognise the unspoken need for urgent reform. As Professor Allan Fels said in his statement, “This deafening silence on mental health cannot be justified”.

    The ‘Alliance for Better Access’ is recognised by the major parties as a stakeholder on this significant issue of public concern, but right now we need all sides of politics to tell us what they intend to do ahead of the election. Join us in calling for policy reform. Tell our politicians that mental health matters to you leading up to the election.

    You can find out how this issue is developing at http://www.betteraccess.net/index.php/information/latest-news/green-light and have your say in the comments below. Please spread the word.

    Every voice makes a difference!

    Dr Ben Mullings, Alliance for Better Access

    This message was sent by Dr Ben Mullings using the Change.org system. You received this email because you signed a petition started by Dr Ben Mullings on Change.org: “Australia needs Better Access to psychological treatment.” Change.org does not endorse contents of this message.

    View the petition  |  Reply to this message via Change.org

  • Sixth senate spot shapes as main electoral battleground in SA

    Sixth senate spot shapes as main electoral battleground in SA

    By Nick Harmsen

    Posted 3 hours 29 minutes ago

    There aren’t many contests to capture the nation’s interest in South Australia this election, but the Senate race will be one.

    A battle between the Greens and high profile Independent Nick Xenophon for first preference votes could shape the balance of power, imposing its influence on the next government.

    At 25, Greens candidate Sarah Hanson-Young made history as the youngest Senator when she was elected in 2007.

    Five years later, she faces the risk of early and involuntary political retirement.

    “Tony Abbott wants this seat so that he can get effective control of the Parliament,” she says.

    “And he’s doing everything he can to do it. So I’ve got a fight on my hands.”

    Megaphone negotiations are not a good way to deal with these issues.

    Independent Senator Nick Xenophon responds to Bob Brown

     

    Her prospects aren’t helped by the presence of Nick Xenophon.

    He may not have the backing of a party machine, but the ‘No Pokies’ campaigner has built a large public profile in his experience in the Senate and the Legislative Council of the South Australian Parliament.

    “I’m having to do this as a grassroots campaign, going to community centres, appealing for volunteers,” he says.

    “Because my biggest challenge is to have enough people at polling booths to hand out how-to-vote cards for me.”

    Watching Senator Xenophon campaign, recognition seems to be the last of his worries.

    He won 14.78 per cent of first preference votes at the 2007 election, securing a quota in his own right.

    Several of his opponents expect that vote to grow towards 20 per cent, a figure he secured when re-elected to the state parliament in 2006.

    Because my seat is on such a knife edge, [Nick Xenophon has] effectively preferenced the Liberal Party over the Greens, giving Tony Abbott a leg up to control the Parliament.

    Greens Senator Sarah Hanson Young

     

    So dominant is the Xenophon juggernaut, the Greens – through former Leader Bob Brown – made a public pitch to secure the independent’s preferences, but the bid backfired.

    “Megaphone negotiations are not a good way to deal with these issues,” Senator Xenophon says.

    He has instead decided to run a split preference ticket, meaning his excess votes would flow to Labor and Liberal candidates before the Greens.

     

    That’s a worry for Sarah Hanson-Young.

    “Because my seat is on such a knife edge, he’s effectively preferenced the Liberal Party over the Greens, giving Tony Abbott a leg up to control the Parliament.”

    Coalition control of both houses of Parliament is a mathematical impossibility according to South Australian Liberal Senator Simon Birmingham.

    But he does acknowledge the re-election of Nick Xenophon, coupled with Sarah Hanson-Young losing to a Liberal, could deliver real benefits to a Coalition government.

    “South Australia is critical to breaking the Labor-Greens stranglehold. Absolutely essential,” he says.

    “And we really would rather not have to govern in a situation where the Labor and Greens alliance in the Senate can still hold us to ransom.”

    Topics: federal-elections, federal-parliament, government-and-politics, greens, sa, adelaide-5000

  • Flying low over Greenland, Icepod tracks changes in the ice sheet

    Flying low over Greenland, Icepod tracks changes in the ice sheet

    A suite of radar and imaging systems is helping scientists to find out how melting happens and detect early signs of instability in the ice – useful as cracks in the landing strip become a hazard

    Link to video: Scientists track Greenland’s melting ice sheets with ‘Icepod’The LC-130 Hercules flew low over the ice sheet in a tight grid pattern, Teflon-coated landing skis barely 300 metres above the soft upper layer of snow. At the rear of the plane, scientists clustered round a monitor displaying a regular pattern of dark red waves generated by a radar signal.

    Somewhere in the vast, white emptiness below were two tiny cracks – barely 10cm (4in) across – imperceptible to the naked eye from this altitude, especially beneath fresh snow.

    But the cracks ran across an ice runway providing the only access to Camp Raven, a research outpost and extreme weather training centre for the US military, perched atop 1.25 miles (2km) of ice on one of the highest, coldest points on the Greenland ice sheet. If the researchers could detect cracks that small, it would constitute a scientific triumph.

    The 10-strong team from the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University are testing a suite of airborne radar and imaging systems known as IcePod, designed to track changes in the Greenland ice sheet. It would also confirm early signs of instability in the ice.

    The latest research into how melting happens has proved more interesting and complicated than researchers initially thought – not just gusts of warm air or dramatic spectacles of chunks of ice calving into the sea. It is now clear that melting has been happening rapidly in some parts of Greenland, and that meltwater can itself bring about new melting. All this matters because ice melt in Greenland is the single largest cause of global sea level rise, which is affecting coastlines around the world.

    Last month, Greenland had its warmest day since records began in the late 1950s, with the weather station at Maniitsoq (Sugar Loaf) on the south-western coast registering 78.6F (26C) on the afternoon of 30 July, the Danish Meteorological Institute reported.

    And on 11-12 July last year, gusts of warm air caused melting on virtually the entire surface of the ice sheet. The meltwater pouring off the glaciers washed out the main bridge at the town of Kangerlussuaq, the hub for scientists studying the Greenland ice sheet. All this is straining the ice sheet in various locations.

    “The ice is failing. The ice is getting stretched,” said Robin Bell, the geophysicist leading the IcePod mission.

    The LC-130s, the military’s cargo haulers, had landed at Camp Raven all season without incident, but the ice sheet is weakening, she said.

    “Ice is like silly putty. If you move it slowly it goes like this,” she said, drawing her hands slowly apart. “But if you yank it, it will snap … That is what is happening with the ice sheet.”

    The cracks at Raven would eventually turn into big crevasses, she said. Would the radar be able to discern those cracks? “If we could see 10cm cracks I would be really jazzed,” Bell said.

    It was during the extraordinary melt last year that crew at the New York Air National Guard, walking on the ice runway, discovered the cracks at Camp Raven.

    “They are in close proximity to the ski way, but are not affecting any of our operations right now,” said Major Joshua Hicks, as he flew the C-130 in a series of passes over the runway. “We’re not talking large crevasses, that would be a problem. We are talking small, small cracks that we are monitoring.”

    But they can become a hazard. Some years ago, in Antarctica, the landing ski of a US air national guard aircraft became caught in a crevasse beneath the snow and the aircraft sank into the ice. “We want to watch for them to make sure they are not going to get any larger,” Hicks said. The camp sits on the flanks of the central mountain range. The site has a year-round population of two. The only permanent structure is an abandoned cold war-era domed radar installation which once guarded against a possible Soviet missile attack on North America.

    But Raven is used during the summer by researchers and the New York Air National Guard to test pilots on the ice strip landings used in Greenland and Antarctica.

    The pace of change has turned Greenland into a destination for scientists gathering evidence of climate change in real time and trying to predict its consequences. Satellite evidence indicates that Greenland has experienced continuous melting and ice loss for the past 22 years. The researchers aim to understand what this will mean for the ice sheet and what impact the melting will have globally.

    In high summer, Kangerlussuaq in the south-west of the island is overrun by scientists. On their side of town, in a row of barracks-type buildings, researchers study every aspect of ice sheets and glaciers and how they change: how they calve, what happens when ice meets fjord, snow crystal structures and sediment deposits. Some of those changes were clearly visible from the bubble observation window at the rear of the IcePod team’s LC-130, and on the feeds from the instruments bolted to a capsule on the side of the plane.

    The IcePod project combines five instrument sets: a scanning laser to measure the ice surface, a radar trained at the upper crust of the ice sheet, another radar to penetrate to the bedrock up to 2,700 metres beneath the ice, a visual camera and an infrared camera producing thermal images. The instruments were shrunk and installed in a capsule bolted to the left of the plane.

    The idea was to produce a regular data record of changes in the ice sheet, in far greater detail than is possible with satellite picture resolution, and covering far more ground than a traditional expedition.

    The pod was also designed to be self-contained. “Traditionally, we built our systems into the plane structure,” said Nick Frearson, the senior engineer for the project.

    With IcePod, however, he added: “We can piggyback on missions. The Air National Guard can bolt the pod on to the plane, and we can kind of get that data for free.”

    As the plane flew low over the ice sheet on a test run last month, from Russell glacier towards the interior of Greenland, the ice at lower elevations was grimy from dirt forcing its way to the surface, the snow cut by countless black creases.

    Deeper inland, the ice sheet turned cleaner and whiter, the surface cut by occasional long and winding channels of water or pools in a startling bright turquoise. Near Summit camp, the highest point on the ice sheet, there was nothing to see but white. But even at those elevations, the ice was moving, albeit at only a few centimetres every year.

    On the edges of the ice – especially where ice meets water – the team saw ice melt proceeding rapidly. On the west of the island, Jakobshavn glacier was sliding into the fjord at an average of seven miles a year. Petermann glacier in north-west Greenland last year shed an iceberg twice the size of Manhattan.

    And at the top of Greenland, where the ice is two miles deep, it is not melting because of the sun alone, said Kirsty Tinto, a Lamont geologist with the IcePod team. “It has become increasingly clear that it isn’t just the balance of solar radiation that is melting the ice,” she said.

    The instruments inside the IcePod capsule provided a closer view of those changes occurring at the surface than existing satellite images.

    The researchers hoped to study the waterways at the top of the ice sheet, which transport water across the ice or funnel it down towards the bedrock.

    Some formations, known as moulins, have been known to drain entire glacier lakes in a matter of hours, drawing the water right down to the bedrock. That water layer beneath the ice in turn speeds the ice sheet’s slide towards the ocean.

    Scientists are also studying what happens when glaciers meet ocean, and how the mixing of fresh and salt water accelerates ice loss. And they hope to track those changes across the seasons, through regular flights.

    “It is sort of being able to capture the pulse of the ice sheet several times a year,” said Bell. “We used to think it happened slowly. Now we know it is happening on a human time scale.”

    In 2007, an international team of scientists set out to map 2,700-metre (8,900ft) mountains beneath the snow and ice of eastern Antarctica.

    The survey of the Gamburtsev range involved scientists from seven countries, camped for months on either side of the range. Their only direct connection to the outside world was through military cargo planes, which flew in supplies and performed 17 airdrops of fuel.

    The high-altitude and dangerous enterprise took two years and cost about $25m (£16m), and when the survey was complete some researchers asked themselves: why not use a plane?

    The scale of that ambitious exercise was the inspiration for IcePod. The $5.9m initiative was launched in 2009 with a grant from Barack Obama’s recovery act. It represents the latest effort to study the vast expanses of the Greenland and Antarctica ice sheets using satellite data and aircraft mounted systems instead of boots on the ground – or boats in a fjord clogged with icebergs.

    ‘It’s no mean feat shoehorning these things into a small cigar-shaped box’

    “You don’t bring an ice breaker up into these fjords to do traditional oceanography because there are so many icebergs. It’s not a place you want to go. It’s not a very safe environment,” said Chris Zappa, an oceanographer with the project. “The beauty of this instrument package is that we can do this cutting edge science and learn more about how the process occurs.”

    The IcePod suite deploys five instrument systems in combination to generate more targeted and higher resolution images than available by satellite. Unlike earlier systems, the IcePod is entirely self-contained, and can be swapped out on to different aircraft.

    The use of aircraft also allows for more regular data collection, with researchers planning three visits a season to Greenland.

    Scientists increasingly are looking for such targetted images, Zappa said. “Until now people have studied the whole ice sheet,” he said. But he added: “It’s becoming more and more important to understand the surface processes.”

    Other projects have used similar instruments to track the changes in the ice sheets, but Lamont’s version was the first time an entire suite of instruments had been collapsed in size and deployed together, the scientists said.

    The biggest challenge was shrinking the instruments so they would fit inside a capsule measuring 8ft by 2ft .

    “It is no mean feat trying to shoehorn all these things into a small cigar-shaped box, and to try and get a good data reference set from it,” said Nick Frearson, the senior engineer on the project.

    Then there was the matter of compensating for the movement and vibration of the host aircraft to avoid blurred images, or data crashes from disconnecting cables.

    “The plane pitches and rolls. It is not flying in dedicated straight lines. These are all things that have to be accounted for,” Frearson said.

    The suite includes a scanning lasar to measure the ice surface, a radar trained at the upper crust of the ice sheet, about 100 to 200 yards, another radar to penetrate through 2 miles of ice to the bedrock below, a visual camera, and an infrared camera.

    The infrared camera produces thermal images of the ice sheet, enabling researchers to track temperature changes deep down inside crevasses on the surface of the ice sheet, or trace the circulation patterns of icebergs as they float off into the fjord.