Weren't we just talking about satellites going wrong? Right in time for federal budgetary belt-tightening, NASA manages to lose their Orbiting Carbon Observatory before it observed any carbon. In fact, they managed to lose it even before it made one orbit. We're supposed to leave the rocket science to rocket scientists, but maybe they're too busy calculating to notice such a loss is a spectacular way to attract the unfavorable attention of the new boss.

The OCO was cleverly constructed to analyze specific spectral characteristics of carbon dioxide and oxygen simultaneously. From a near polar orbit it could observe most of the planet to coordinate its data with other atmospheric sniffers. We were set to get a good picture of the global carbon cycle, had the mission succeeded. Which it didn't.

The mission failed because the rocket carrying the satellite failed to achieve a useful orbit around the earth. The rocket was apparently too heavy late in its flight, and the immediate suspect is a payload protective fairing that failed to separate, dragging the final stage down. ("Ya, the explosive bolts" didn't explode.) The Taurus rocket used to lift the Observer does not enjoy a stellar reputation among lift vehicles, since a quarter of its launches have failed including two of the last three. Three to one odds may be fair for true gamesters, but seem like unfair odds for a fairing.

We're not supposed to mention the price tags for these expensive cannon balls but at least three hundred million dollars just went into the icy drink. (Why, that's about two days that could have been poured into Middle Eastern sand instead!) What's more costly though is the loss of reputation. A major part of somebody's career went into designing and building the thing only to have it splash down off Antarctica. One or more careers of somebody else now hang on a thread awaiting the investigation of why such a simple system didn't work.

Are we to conclude this mission was given low priority to have been assigned such a risky ride? There must be any number of more reliable launch vehicles. Other countries can put satellites around the moon now, and aren't they alarmed by global warming alarmism too? For heaven's sake, don't we still have shuttles flying? I plan on savoring the investigation and slow broil for those responsible. It's said we learn more from our mistakes than from our successes. It's not too much to ask that precious eggs be placed in more reliable baskets.