This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Shuttle News 1997-2003

Endeavour's Arrival In California Is not Very Green

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
September 4, 2012
Filed under

Tree removal for space shuttle arrival tempers excitement, LA Times
“… for some residents in South L.A., the excitement of the shuttle rumbling through their neighborhoods quickly faded when they learned that 400 trees will be chopped down to make room for the behemoth. The California Science Center — Endeavour’s final home — has agreed to replant twice as many trees along the route from the shuttle’s docking place at Los Angeles International Airport to Exposition Park… Several alternatives for the Oct. 12 move were considered but ultimately discarded. Taking the massive shuttle apart would have damaged the delicate tiles that acted as heat sensors.”
Keith’s note: Just how many tiles are we talking about? Didn’t NASA pull tiles on and off of shuttles on a routine basis – for decades? I am sure a few of those tile maintenance folks could have used a little consulting work. Since these shuttles are not going to fly again, why is this a big deal? The engines on these orbiters are now fake. Indeed, just today NASA announced that it was still trying to give shuttle tiles away. If NASA ever releases the actual proposals it will be interesting to see if the tree removal was mentioned and what effect it would have on property values.

NASA Watch founder, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA, Away Teams, Journalist, Space & Astrobiology, Lapsed climber.

27 responses to “Endeavour's Arrival In California Is not Very Green”

  1. eech1234 says:
    0
    0

    I’m not sure why they don’t just roll it up the 105 to the 110 in the middle of the night.  No traffic, and the 110 exits right next to the science center…

    • Steve Pemberton says:
      0
      0

      The top of Endeavour’s tail is 56 feet above the ground and so it cannot pass under overpasses, a problem which eliminated many potential routes.

      • eech1234 says:
        0
        0

        Good point, I forgot about all the overpasses (and this comes from having lived there for quite a while).  

  2. Anonymous says:
    0
    0

    Keith

    More than likely the article is garbled.  It is my understanding that they would have had to disassemble the wings to get the Shuttle to fit.  That was simply not going to happen.

  3. fieldtrip says:
    0
    0

    “not Very Green”
    Who cares.
    It’s So-Cal, the trees grow back fast. In fact, young trees take up more CO2 than  mature trees, so chop away. Next time save money, just ask – I’ll bring my chain saw.
    I can’t stand it when educated, space flight professionals buy into the “green religion” cr*% any way. 
     

    • Mark_Flagler says:
      0
      0

      Spoken like an apartment dweller.
      And beyond that, a home’s market worth is often increased by the presence of trees on its lot. Remove trees, remove not just shade and beauty, but value as well.

    • Steve Whitfield says:
      0
      0

      Who cares?

      Any informed person with half a brain cares about 400 trees being cut down in a developed area.

      • fieldtrip says:
        0
        0

         

        Do you have any conception of the thousands of trees cut
        down every year for various public and private construction projects in a city
        the size of Los Angeles? And of course, those trees wouldn’t be there in the
        first place if it weren’t for the LA aqueduct and the Colorado River Project.
        Millions of trees were sacrificed to build the aqueducts & dams while the
        vast Colorado River Delta was essentially destroyed in order to terraform  the LA basin. Humans do that, we terraform.
        We are natural gardeners; we move water around to suit our needs.   

        No I’m not an apartment dweller.  I recently cut down a huge cottonwood tree on
        my property outside Boulder to make way for solar panels, a satellite dish and
        to protect my home from potential damage from the aging tree. I didn’t cry
        about it, that cottonwood tree like all the others in my neighborhood were
        planted by the city half a century ago in what was a semi-arid prairie
        landscape. 

        In fact, all the foothills around Boulder (and probably LA)
        were once treeless open-scrubland until white settlers arrived and started
        planting trees. The whole Denver basin is a sea of green now (in the summer) where
        150 years ago was semi-arid prairie with only cotton woods lining the creeks.
        Now we divert water from the Western Slope to transform the landscape.

        Think of the millions of trees cut down to clear land for
        KSC, the test stands in Mississippi, all the NASA centers and contractor plants
        with their vast parking lots. The trees that were cut down or never allowed to
        grow were LAX sprawls now.

        On the other hand, vast areas of the Eastern US are now
        wooded and protected where Native Americans then early settlers cleared the
        land.  Here in Colorado an area the size
        of some Eastern states is now Wilderness Area where you can’t even ride a bicycle
        lest you disturb the sacred forest.

        Finally, think about all the carbon spewed into the air by the
        coal fired generating station powering the servers that allow us to waste time swapping
        emails over such a trivial matter.

        Please…step away from the computer, go curl up
        in the fetal position and stop wasting humanities time and resources.

        • hikingmike says:
          0
          0

          Good stuff. I’ve been to LA a lot and it hasn’t rained once, hehe.

          I just hiked in Great Smoky Mountain National Park in an area that had been completely clearcut and is now completely wooded again. It may not be the same old growth but it’s working on it. The trees just have to worry about the bugs now.

          By the way, the more Wilderness Areas, the merrier 🙂

  4. Steve Pemberton says:
    0
    0

    Orbiters in the VAB used to be lifted vertically and turned sideways in order to move them through the narrow openings between the transfer aisle and high bays.  I wonder if they could have come up with a way to move Endeavour in a similar manner through the streets of L.A.   Obviously it’s not the same situation since they won’t be moving it with a crane, and it would not be inexpensive as it would require modifying an existing vehicle or perhaps building a custom vehicle that could safely carry Endeavour in a vertical orientation.  But the alternative is a lot of bad publicity.  I just saw Brian Williams mention the controversy about this on NBC Nightly News with a comment that they will be following this story.

    • Steve Whitfield says:
      0
      0

      Steve,

      If a recall correctly, the Shuttle hoist in the VAB is an integral part of the VAB, and the anchorage structure would be way too wide to for the route, even if it could be removed, especially when you add a transport mechanism.  And the overpass height is still a problem.

      Steve

      • Steve Pemberton says:
        0
        0

        Steve W,

        It’s an interesting thought exercise even if they will never do it.  Might have been a good project to give the students at Caltech!

        The wingspan of the orbiter is 78 feet, wide enough apparently to take out 400 trees.  Turned vertically and sideways, with landing gear retracted, the orbiter is 46 ft wide.  Some type of vertical scaffold/gantry would have to be constructed to hold the orbiter using the three existing attachment points on the bottom of the orbiter.  Let’s say the support structure adds 14 feet to the width, for a total width of 60 feet. And they would need to find (or custom build) a vehicle that is no wider than that which can safely support all of this.

        The end result would be a savings of only 18 feet, but maybe that’s enough to save most of the trees.  By the way the route that they will be using doesn’t have any overpasses which is why they chose it.  Just some power lines and signal lights to move out of the way.

        The orbiter would be lifted onto the vehicle using cranes, perhaps the same ones that will be used to demate Endeavour at LAX after it lands.

        Problems:

        – The existing cranes have never been used to lift an orbiter vertically, at least not that I know of.  If they can’t then other cranes would need to be brought in which can.  Either way, they would want to do a trial run using a test article. Unfortunately Pathfinder is currently busy entertaining visitors in Huntsville and is not available.

        – Designing and building a scaffold/gantry would cost money.

        – Customizing a vehicle to hold all of it would cost money.

        – Custom building a vehicle if needed would cost a lot of money!

        – Increased risk to the orbiter in case something goes wrong.

        – Insert other problems here, I’m sure there are others.
        The bottom line is bye-bye trees.

  5. David_McEwen says:
    0
    0

    400. Really? That just bites. I lived in LA for many years, and trees are a precious commodity.  I don’t care if they do replant double the number they cut down. It will take years for them to grow back. If I were a local resident, I’d be pretty hopping mad. Someone had to know this was going to happen when the proposal was being submitted to place the shuttle at the CSC. I wonder how much it is going to cost the city to chop down those trees?

    • Steve Pemberton says:
      0
      0

      I lived in Southern California for over thirty-five years so I know what you mean. If there really isn’t an alternative to cutting down trees then it seems like they could have avoided much of the controversy by publishing ahead of time a plan for how the restoration will look when it’s complete, which depending on how it is done could be a long term improvement.  During their advance publicity they could have also pointed out something that most outsiders and probably even many residents of Los Angeles aren’t aware of which is that due to having an almost semi-arid climate, pre-civilization Los Angeles had very few trees and was mostly comprised of grassy plains.  Most of the trees that we now see along the streets of Los Angeles were planted by developers and cities.  That’s not to say that chopping them down should be treated lightly, but a project like this gives the possibility to reevaluate the types of trees that will replace the existing ones, not to mention the planting of approximately 400 new trees in locations that currently do not have any.

      Of course for the first several years it’s going to look a lot different while waiting for the new trees to grow.  How long depends on the type of trees and whether they plant saplings (cheapest) or already maturing trees (much more expensive). Being up front about all of this ahead of time, including what the costs will be, would have gone a long way toward at least reducing the understandably negative reaction that is now taking place. Supposedly officials did try and be proactive in sharing their plans with local residents, but in hindsight they probably realize now that they should have broadened their publicity efforts to avoid what could now turn into a public relations nightmare.

  6. Stephen Braham says:
    0
    0

    Don’t they know how cargo-carrying aerospace vehicles are supposed to move between trees?

    http://www.youtube.com/watc

    (1:35 or so ;))

  7. jamito02 says:
    0
    0

    Who’s decision was this?  NASA or the California Science Center.  This also happened months ago when a giant rock was moved: http://articles.latimes.com

  8. chriswilson68 says:
    0
    0

    This is pretty bad.  NASA never should have agreed to give a shuttle to someplace that planned to leave scars in the city for decades to come because of the orbiter.

  9. bobhudson54 says:
    0
    0

    California wanted the shuttle for their science center and this is the drawback from the problematic issue of transporting the vehicle to its new location. You couldn’t fly it in nor could you drop it in via helicopter,the only route was via highway.Residents should have done research on transporting Endeavor.they would have discovered what was involved. You asked for it,you got it and now deal with it.

    • Steve Whitfield says:
      0
      0

      Bobby,

      I did the math.  It would take 2200 synchronized helicopters to lift the Shuttle’s mass using the helicopter with the largest lift capability.  Of course, there’s nowhere near that many of them in existence.  I think you hit the nail on the head — somebody didn’t do their research, or more likely just made assumptions instead of going after the facts.  This is one for the Guinness Book, but what on Earth would you call it; world’s worst taxi drive?

      Steve

  10. Peter R says:
    0
    0

    removing trees is not a WIN under any circumstances. Humans, buildings, space shuttle do not produce Oxygen. We are so short-sited and think there will always be O2 to breathe. Bottom line let a few get broken – or better yet put hydraulic lifts on the flat bed towing it.
    Very sad

    • hikingmike says:
      0
      0

      1. They are replacing them with double the amount of trees.
      2. This is a drop… an atom… an electron in a bucket compared to deforestation basically anywhere, much less the Amazon rainforest. LA is urban and these trees are mostly for looks. For oxygen, much better to save a few Portugal’s worth of Amazon Rainforest-

      “In the nine years from 1991 to 2000, the total area of Amazon Rainforest cleared rose from 415,000 to 587,000 km²; a total area of more than six times that of Portugal”
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wik

  11. Patrick Judd says:
    0
    0

    This is something occupying minds while there is war and pestulence going on? The decision has been made and chopping 400 and getting 800 in return is a good thing! sorry if it doesn’t fit the immediate timelines since they will take some time to grow…yawn, this kind of outrage makes me tired…

    • Steve Pemberton says:
      0
      0

      Just trying to follow all of your points:

      – You are okay with the decision about the trees.  
      Got it.  Seems like most people are either for or against, with valid arguments on either side. Now we know where you stand.

      – People just need to be patient, the trees will eventually grow back, and there will be more of them.  
      It’s a bit easier to have that opinion when it’s not your neighborhood, but okay it’s still a valid point.

      – People should not be thinking about this while there is war and pestilence going on.  
      Wow. Not exactly sure what the message is here.  I guess people should not discuss or be concerned about or complain about anything that falls short of a war and pestilence level of gravitas? 

      – People who are outraged about things like this are making you tired.  And sleepy.

      Does that pretty much sum things up?

      • Patrick Judd says:
        0
        0

         I am just tired of everyone being outraged…about everything that doesn’t fit neatly into their own  little worldview. Why can’t we all just relax a bit? For instance, there are 24,000,000 people looking for work. I think the outrage should be saved for reaction to truly outrageous things, not 400 trees being replaced with 800 trees.

        • Steve Pemberton says:
          0
          0

          Understood.  It’s a valid point, one that all of us should try and remember as we deal with the various things that don’t go our way in life.

  12. Juddy B says:
    0
    0

    well, I just heard the spokeshole from the Meuseum and he didn’t sound very green at all, more like greedy..  and the shill sitting next to him was pretty much a total sell-out as well!  I do understand that the sidewalks are messed up and the old trees need to go, however, they are replacing them with 8-12 inch saplings!  That’s pretty small, I mean how many years is it gonna take for these little trees to provide shade?  Who’s is in charge of this project to guarantee the trees all grow back and are replaced if they die out.  Why didn’t they plant bigger trees, like 8-10ft trees, instead of 8 inches, that’s ridiculous!
    First of all they need to install a water system underground so that the roots to creep out and destroy the street and side walks..  second, why don’t they just saw the wings off the shuttle and then glue it back on?  It’s not like we are gonna use that relic again?  What is Will Smith gonna jump in there and save the planet so we have to keep it in mint condition.. lol..  give me a break !