Space Capsule Carrying Ashes Of Over 160 Crashes Into Pacific Ocean
In a statement, the company said that the capsule was "launched successfully, powered the payloads nominally in-orbit, stabilized itself after separation with the launcher, re-entered and re-established communication after black out," but then things went off script. As per the New York Post, the company stated that it "lost communication" with the capsule "a few minutes before splash down." It added that it is still "investigating the root cause".
"We apologize to all our clients who entrusted us with their payloads," the company said in a statement in the letter.
"We all hoped for full success; partial success is often part of the road for those who take risks and push boundaries to change the world positively. I take full responsibility and present my apologies to our customers for not achieving full success," said TEC CEO Helene Huby in a LinkedIn Post.
Celestis, a Texas-based space burial company which was part of the mission, stated that this was the first Celestis mission in which ashes were "designed to return from orbit". However, it noted that due to the crash into the Pacific Ocean, the ashes were dispersed at sea. As a result of this, they believe that they would "not be able to recover or return the flight capsules aboard."
"Though we currently believe that we cannot return the flight capsules, we hope families will find some peace in knowing their loved ones were part of a historic journey, launched into space, orbited Earth, and are now resting in the vastness of the Pacific, akin to a traditional and honored sea scattering," the company said in a statement, according to People.
Notably, ashes weren't the only thing on board the space capsule. Cannabis plant matter and seeds launched as part of a citizen science project called Martian Grow were also on board the capsule, per the outlet.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
35 minutes ago
- Mint
Trump administration seeks to ban China from buying US farms
The Trump administration has a message for China: Keep off the farm. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said Tuesday the administration will work with state lawmakers to ban sales of U.S. farmland to buyers from China and other countries of concern, citing national-security interests. Rollins, joined by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, said the government is ratcheting up scrutiny on existing land owned by Chinese buyers and is looking at ways to potentially claw back past purchases. 'We'll never let foreign adversaries control our land," said Rollins. State and federal lawmakers for years have warned that China and other countries could use U.S. farmland to facilitate spying or wield influence over the U.S. food supply chain. Chinese-owned entities hold nearly 300,000 acres—roughly 0.02%—of U.S. farmland, according to Agriculture Department data, an area about the size of Los Angeles. Republicans and Democrats alike have sought to curb foreign ownership of American farmland, at times seeking to increase government scrutiny of purchases and investments. Critics have raised fears that foreign owners could drive up land prices or sidestep environmental rules. China's government has played down such concerns as overblown. Representatives of China's embassy in Washington, D.C., had no immediate comment. Rollins said on Tuesday that U.S. farms are under threat from China and other countries that are trying to infiltrate American agricultural research and steal technology. 'No longer can foreign adversaries assume we aren't watching," Hegseth said. Some state and municipal lawmakers have taken steps in recent years to block China-backed investment or ownership in U.S. agriculture. The city of Grand Forks, N.D., in 2023 halted the construction of a Chinese-owned corn mill after a U.S. Air Force official said the planned $700 million facility could represent a national-security risk because of its proximity to a nearby base. Some China-based ownership of U.S. farmland involves prominent U.S. agriculture companies. Pork giant Smithfield Foods and seed and pesticide supplier Syngenta have both faced criticism from government officials and lawmakers because of their Chinese owners. Smithfield is majority-owned by Chinese pork company WH Group and Syngenta is a subsidiary of China National Chemical. The companies' American leaders have pushed back, saying their China-based owners have helped them invest in U.S. farmers and create jobs. Smithfield in the past represented roughly half of the U.S. farmland owned by Chinese entities, via its Hong Kong-based parent. Much of that had been tied up in hundreds of company-owned hog farms and processing plants, according to federal data. WH Group acquired Smithfield in 2013, aiming to harness its technology and expertise to boost WH's operations in China. Smithfield returned to the U.S. public markets earlier this year, raising roughly $500 million after listing its shares on the Nasdaq Stock Market. WH Group owns about 93% of Smithfield's shares. 'We're an American company, American management team and made in America," Smithfield Chief Executive Shane Smith said in an interview earlier this year. Smithfield last year sold more than 40,000 acres of its U.S. farmland, leaving it with roughly 85,000 acres. Shares of Smithfield fell about 1% on Tuesday. Syngenta, the largest pesticide seller in the U.S., has said it owns a small amount of land for research, development and regulatory trials. The company, which employs about 4,000 people in the U.S., has previously faced calls to sell its farmland holdings. Two years ago, Arkansas ordered Syngenta to sell about 160 acres in the state, where it maintained an agricultural research facility with a few dozen employees. Syngenta at the time called the state's decision shortsighted. A Syngenta spokesman said Tuesday that the company is in the process of selling its remaining U.S. farmland and currently owns less than 1,000 acres in the country. Write to Patrick Thomas at
Indian Express
35 minutes ago
- Indian Express
US Supreme Court clears way for Trump to pursue mass federal layoffs
The US Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared the way for President Donald Trump's administration to resume plans for mass government job firing and the sweeping downsizing of several federal agencies, a verdict which could lead to thousands of layoffs as critics warn it could also threaten critical government services. In a major victory for the US government, the Supreme Court on Tuesday lifted a lower court's order that had frozen sweeping federal layoffs known as 'reduction in force' which Trump had passed through an executive order in February, directing the agencies to prepare for mass layoffs. After Trump's order, the administration had come up with plans to reduce staff at the US Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, State, Treasury, Veterans Affairs and several other federal agencies. BREAKING: Supreme Court *allows* the Trump administration to implement large-scale layoffs across the federal government as litigation continues The order is 8-1, with Justice Jackson dissenting — Jacob Wheeler (@JWheelertv) July 8, 2025 The Supreme Court, in a brief unsigned order, stated that the Trump administration was 'likely to succeed' in its argument that the directives issued by the president were legally valid and well within his purview. The top court's verdict is the latest victory for the Trump administration which is making efforts to consolidate power in the executive branch. The US Supreme Court has sided with the Trump administration in multiple cases on an emergency expedited basis since the republican leader returned to power in January, including clearing the way for implementation of immigration policies. Earlier in May, San Francisco-based US District Judge Susan Illston had temporarily blocked the large-scale federal layoffs and ruled that President Trump exceeded his power in ordering the government downsizing without prior consultation with the Congress. The decision by the Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared a major obstacle for the White House which meant that the court wasn't assessing the legality of any specific layoff plans at federal agencies. White House spokesperson Harrison Fields welcomed the apex court's verdict and called it a 'definitive victory for the president and his administration'. (with inputs from Reuters)
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Trump says U.S. to impose 50% tariff on copper imports, copper futures jump
President Donald Trump said he will announce a 50% tariff on copper on Tuesday (July 8, 2025), hoping to boost U.S. production of a metal critical to electric vehicles, military hardware, the power grid and many consumer goods. U.S. Comex copper futures jumped more than 12% to a record high after Mr. Trump announced the planned tariffs, which came earlier than the industry had expected, and the rate was steeper. Mr. Trump told reporters at a White House cabinet meeting that he planned to make the copper tariff announcement later in the day but he did not say when the tariff would take effect. "I believe the tariff on copper, we're going to make 50%," Mr. Trump said. After Mr. Trump spoke, U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said in an interview on CNBC that the copper tariffs would likely be put in place by the end of July or August 1. He said Mr. Trump would post details on his Truth Social media account sometime on Tuesday. In February, the administration announced a so-called Section 232 investigation into U.S. imports of the red metal. The deadline for the investigation to conclude was November, but Lutnick said the review was already complete. "The idea is to bring copper home, bring copper production home, bring the ability to make copper, which is key to the industrial sector, back home to America," Mr. Lutnick said. The National Mining Association declined to comment, saying it preferred to wait until details were released. The American Critical Minerals Association did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Copper is used in construction, transportation, electronics and many other industries. The U.S. imports roughly half of its copper needs each year. Major copper mining projects across the U.S. have faced strong opposition in recent years due to a variety of reasons, including Rio Tinto and BHP's Resolution Copper project in Arizona and Northern Dynasty Minerals's Pebble Mine project in Alaska. Shares of the world's largest copper producer, Phoenix-based Freeport-McMoRan, shot up nearly 5% in Tuesday afternoon trading. The company, which produced 1.26 billion pounds of copper in the U.S. last year, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Freeport, which would benefit from U.S. copper tariffs but worries that the duties would hurt the global economy, has advised Mr. Trump to focus on boosting U.S. copper production. Countries set to be most affected by any new U.S. copper tariff would be Chile, Canada and Mexico, which were the top suppliers to the U.S. of refined copper, copper alloys and copper products in 2024, according to U.S. Census Bureau data. Chile, Canada and Peru— three of the largest copper suppliers to the U.S.— have told the administration that imports from their countries do not threaten U.S. interests and should not face tariffs. All three have free trade deals with the U.S. Mexico's Economy Ministry, Chile's Foreign Ministry and Canada's Finance Ministry did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Chile's Mining Ministry and Codelco, that country's leading copper miner, declined to comment. A 50% tariff on copper imports would hit U.S. companies that use the metal because the country is years away from meeting its needs, said Ole Hansen, head of commodity strategy at Saxo Bank. "The U.S. has imported a whole year of demand over the past six months, so the local storage levels are ample," Mr. Hansen said. "I see a correction in copper prices following the initial jump."
