A grassroots movement has developed in order to have the candidates debate scientific issues. The folks over at Science Debate 2008 have created a tremendous movement, now with the support of 20 Nobel laureates & 10 members of Congress along with thousands of others.

Here’s a list of topics to be covered in the science debate:

The Environment
* ?Climate Change
* ?Conservation and Species Loss
* ?The Future of The Oceans
* ?Fresh Water: Drought, Pollution, Ownership
* ?Population Growth and Its Effect on Environment
* ?Renewable Energy Research

Health and Medicine
* ?Global Diseases and Pandemics
* ?Stem Cell Research
* ?Antibiotic Resistant Bacteria
* ?Drug Patents, Generic Drugs
* ?The Genome
* ?Bioethics

Science and Technology Policy
* ?Scientific Innovation and Economic Growth
* ?Improving Science Education
* ?Space Exploration
* ?Preserving Scientific Integrity in Government
* ?Energy Policy

Do you know where the candidates stand on these issues? Take this quiz to find out.

More Info
Science Debate 2008
Science Friday discusses the science debate

My friend David just wrote a general story on science cafes for WIRED magazine. The piece outlines the science cafe movement, highlighting a few from around the country. However, our little science cafe takes the cake…the picture from the DtaS event on climate change. If you were at the event, you might be (more) famous now!

Check out the story on WIRED: http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/12/science_cafe

Digg the article or post a comment…it’s a quick way to help publicize Down to a Science!

Rather than explore each individual idea in this post, I’ll address the overall movement.

According to estimates, the carbon load in the deep ocean is about 50 times of that in the atmosphere (38,100 vs 750 GigaTons of Carbon). The time it takes for changes in the atmosphere to equilibrate is estimated in the hundreds to thousands of year ranges. Many of the above methodologies use that estimation as a basis for the research.

The rub: ocean chemistry is widely misunderstood. Concerns range from development of toxic algal growths to harming deep sea marine level. In fact, many scientists including Dan Kammen (DtaS speaker on Biofuels) share that concern. Climos, a local San Francisco climate startup, has proposed a set of standards for private entities and researchers when it comes to any ocean fertilization project.

Over the next few days, I’ll be writing on the specifics of many of these issues.

Takeaway:
There is 38,100 gigatons of momentum for carbon sequestration in the ocean. There needs to be some significant oversight on any setup as mistakes could be costly. That being said, the numbers show promise here, with upwards of 50% of anthropogenic carbon being mitigated via these processes.

More Info:
Climos’ Standards
DOE Page explaining Carbon Sequestration
Carbon Cycle
James Lovelock on Science Friday

Takeaway
The article is fun and witty, but doesn’t add much to the conversation. I’m mentioning it mainly since lots of people read SF weekly here locally. Just as at the cafe, there is strong concern in meeting the 2012 target. Without STRONG personal buy in, we ain’t getting there.

More Info
SF Weekly Article

Pics and Videos from the climate change event are up on the website. As always, you can watch snippets of the video on YouTube.

LOSF is a citywide energy conservation event on October 20, 2007. On this night, they are asking the entire city of San Francisco to turn off all non-essential lighting for one hour. To promote long-lasting energy saving, they will also distribute free compact fluorescent light bulbs throughout the city. This savings will reduce carbon emissions into our air and preserve the natural resources used to produce this energy resulting in ongoing reduced costs for the city, taxpayers, and businesses.

Based on a similar event in Sydney Australia, they expect 24.86 tons of CO2 emissions saved. In addition, PG&E will be taking measurements of Saturday night energy usage in San Francisco prior to the Lights Out event, which will be compared to a measurement they will take on the night of October 20, 2007. They’ll publish the energy-saving results from that night on their website. LOSF should be a recurring event…a part of a wider effort to promote energy-saving consciousness in SF.

LOSF is encouraging San Franciscans to join together on October 20th to watch the lights go out. For more information, please visit www.lightsoutsf.org. They will be at 9/24 Down to a Science event on Climate Change in case you have any questions.

Goal: 20% Green House Gas (GHG) reduction by 2012 (20% below 1990 levels) – 7.2 million tons of CO2

Current GHG production/year: 9.7 million tons of CO2 produced

Potential Impacts:
* Sea level rise
* Greater beach erosion
* More frequent El Nino conditions – More rain = less snow in Sierras leading to less water available in summer.
* Marine life – unknown impacts due to changes in water flow and salinity

The actions were broke into four categories: Transportation, Energy Efficiency, Renewable Energy, and Solid Waste. Read on for a breakdown of CO2 savings. I’ll be doing a category by category analysis over the next few days.

Transportation

* 555 of this number comes from a 5 mi/gall increase in federal fuel efficiency standards (CAFE). The city has no control IF and when this would happen.

Energy Efficiency

Renewable Energy

Solid Waste

Totals

Takeaway
Out of the total 2.614 million tons of CO2 reduction, 21.2% comes from a federal increase in CAFE standards (5 mi/gall increase in fuel efficiency for every vehicle). Let’s be frank, we don’t know if that will happen and the city has no control over it. There is also a focus on increasing energy efficiency for businesses, most likely to be incentivized somehow (16.6%). Another big element is buying more green based power – 8.8% – (dependent on state developing more green based power for the grid) and developing wind power (9.14%). Finally, increased recycling, both commercial and residential, accounts for 11.5% reduction.

At least 30% of the reduction comes from factors not directly controllable by the city. At the same time, there are some very admirable and seemingly attainable goals when it comes to recycling and energy efficiency. It’ll be interesting to hear Melissa’s take on how the city is doing 3 years into the 8 year plan.

Takeaway
First off, the interviewer asks zero tough questions. The piece is light, but gives a good overview.

SF has a massively aggressive GHG reduction target, more than Kyoto, more than the California state plan. About half GHG emissions come from transportation, half from buildings (heaters, cooking, electricity, etc.).

The city sees a few ways they can influence GHG emissions:
1. Conservation/education
2. Technical assistance to businesses (engineering consulting)
3. Incentives (tax breaks, fee reduction, expedited permits, etc.)
4. Laws/Regulations (mandating efficient lighting on sale of a building)

Some good news, researchers expect a northern sea route to open up between Europe and Asia in the next few years. Wait, that’s bad news.

The arctic ice cap has always been a variable feature on this planet, showing variation in shrinking and freezing over the course of a summer and winter. However, with increased oceanic temperature, the arctic is showing unprecedented summer shrinkage. Any man who has been in a cold swimming pool knows the feeling.

The study released by the NOAA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, took data from 11 climate models focused from 1979 to 1999. They then applied the models forward to 2050. Summer shrinkage is expected to increase from 18% (1979-1999) to 40% (2007-2050).

Takeaway:
Ice melting rate is increasing. As ice melts, the heat absorption rate of the ocean rises, leading to more ice melting. It’s a snowball effect. Concerning concerning concerning.

In that scenario, check out good ol’ SFO:

Takeaway:
First and foremost, we’re not going to wake up and see SFO underwater. Though after some experiences there, that wouldn’t make me so sad. In reading the report, the most striking item is the uncertainty in sea level rise. Scientists just plain don’t know. What is true, sea level rise along with greater El Nino incidence = greater chance of flooding. And flood damage is the real headache.

More Info:
Chronicle Article on sea level rise
Extensive Sea Level Rise Maps