Jeremy Bruno is a tech writer who blogs about ecology, evolution, conservation and culture at The Voltage Gate. Visit the 
Don't answer that.
Sheril and Chris are orchestrating a new net bomb calling for presidential debate on science and technology issues. The details are scant, even for us, but be sure to check the Intersection for more. The event is only being released to the blogosphere, so the MS media will have to pick up the story from us. In theory.
They are pulling together bloggers - mostly science bloggers, but all are invited - to form a separate coalition of sorts, so that we can put our bitchy powers of persuasion to task, causing a big enough silent stir to make Mike Huckabee's homegrown heart sink.
I'll be pondering some questions over the next week that I would like to ask, but mostly would like to see someone bust balls about ethanol and nuclear power. Jus' sayin'.
Politics
Environment
Comments
I would be surprised if more than 5% of nationally elected politicians could pass a basic high school science test.
I think the main point when you are talking energy is numbers and the ability to scale up. If somebody says they want 20% renewable energy by 2020 - fine. How many more windmills is that, how much will they cost, and will there be the economic and political incentives to build them? (If you take into account you're lucky to get 30% rated capacity out of a windmill, I suspect the answer to the above question is 100,000 - 200,000 more big windmills). If you say you want to build more nuclear plants - fine. How much capability do we have to build these things? And who will staff them - the average age of a current nuclear employee is mid-40's and its hard to attract new workers into the electric industry, since the consumer expectation is that electricity should be very low cost. (Hard to pay salaries with that.) That's my two cents worth - and no more time to dig deeper.......
Since I've already done a lot of digging.... If you would like some context on the atomic subject, I've written a novel that provides an insider's look at the people, politics and technology of the US nuclear industry. "Rad Decision: A Novel of Nuclear Power" is available at no cost to readers at RadDecision.blogspot.com . There are many reviews at the homepage - readers seem to enjoy both the entertainment and information aspects of the book - and Stewart Brand, noted environmentalist and founder of "The Whole Earth Catalog" has said: "I'd like to see Rad Decision widley read." The book is also available in paperback at online readers. I get no royalties.
Posted by: James Aach | December 10, 2007 7:37 PM
"Bitchy powers of persuasion..." Ha! Good idea, but the Iowa caucus/first primary is coming up quick. Not much time to organize a real debate to squeeze answers out of these people. There's no way any candidate will 'dis ethanol before Iowa! I personally don't really care if a candidate has a background in science or can answer lots of specific questions about stem cell research, etc., I just want someone who isn't anti-science and will appoint qualified people to key positions in government scientific agencies, will encourage private scientific enterprise, and who won't tell government scientists what they can/cannot say. Several candidates have pretty decent energy plans, which sure is a start. Especially since many candidates have nothing about energy, but plenty about religion... Hmmm. I've actually already decided who I will vote for in the primaries, mostly because I think the person would be a complete opposite of the Bush presidency on every issue including science (you know, competent).
Posted by: Jen | December 10, 2007 9:20 PM
There aren't any subject-specific debates at all, so why would there necessarily be one on science? I think it's a good idea, but there are other specific subjects that are also important and could be given debates.
Posted by: Libertarian Girl | December 15, 2007 8:51 PM
Several candidates have pretty decent energy plans, which sure is a start. Especially since many candidates have nothing about energy, but plenty about religion..
Posted by: kozmetik | December 23, 2007 1:31 PM