• The Environment

    Let the Record Speak: McCain and Obama on Energy

    By Stuart Fox Posted on 10.8.2008 1 Comments

    After a year of winnowing down questions from 38,000 scientists and citizens, Science Debate 2008 sent 14 covering health, research, the environment and science to the presidential candidates. Both Senator McCain and Senator Obama answered the questions, and their answers can be read here. However, it’s easy for a politician to make promises, so PopSci investigated both senator’s voting records to see if their history matched up with their promises for the future. Each day for the next two weeks we'll present an analysis of the candidate’s voting records as compared with their answers to the ScienceDebate2008 questions. You can follow the entire series at popsci.com/election, where you can also sign up for an RSS feed.

    Question Three: Energy

    Ah, energy. Juice. The ol’ Newton meter. Energy policy sits at the intersection of climate change, national security, the economy, pollution, scientific research and a host of other issues. For the candidates, their position on the US energy policy informs many of their other Science Debate answers, but do those answers match up with their record?

    10.11.2008 at 08:32pm - Comment by Tom_G_Iowa

    Dear PopSci - can you tell us how the candidates voted with regard to blockading the ecologically-friendly, less expensive, resource-conserving ethanol from Brazil, made from sugarcane? Did Obama vote to keep the blockade in place (taxes and tarrifs)? Did McCain vote to keep the blockade in place? Please let us know, so we will have information we need to see where these politicos really stand.

  • Science

    Let the Record Speak: McCain and Obama on Climate Change

    By Stuart Fox Posted on 10.7.2008 7 Comments

    Last year a group of six scientists and journalists began compiling a list of the most important science-related questions the presidential candidates should answer. The result was Science Debate 2008, a project that eventually expanded to include input from 38,000 scientists and citizens, who sent in 3,400 questions. Working with various scientific organizations, the six founders narrowed the submissions down to 14 questions about health, research, the environment and science. Both Senator McCain and Senator Obama answered the questions, and their answers can be read here. However, it’s easy for a politician to make promises, so Popular Science investigated both senator’s voting records to see if their history matched up with their promises for the future. Each day for the next two weeks we'll present an analysis of the candidate’s voting records as compared with their answers to the Science Debate 2008 questions. You can follow the entire series at popsci.com/election, where you can also sign up for an RSS feed.

    Question Two: Climate Change

    In true political fashion, the candidates have come miles to near-agreement, and now haggle over the remaining inches. Both candidates agree that global warming poses a serious threat and needs to be tackled immediately with carbon emission reduction. Both candidates want to institute a cap and trade system to make carbon reduction market friendly. But do they have the record to back it up?

    10.11.2008 at 10:54am - Comment by Tom_G_Iowa

    Confucius say: "In room where everyone is lying, who do you believe?" Time for everyone to learn enough science, math and logic to begin debunking all the lies, from both sides. Lets start with "Cap and Trade". How does it work, and is it good or bad? Simplify an example to a world with only 2 electricity producing plants: one is very clean and the other is a big polluter. The first is awarded millions of dollars in green-tag credits it can sell to polluters. The second has 2 choices: 1) spend billions on smokestack scrubbers and carbon sequestration equipment, or, 2) buy green-tags from company one. If our dirty producer picks option number 1, then it will also be paying gigantic fines at the same time it is paying billions for the "cleaning" equipment for its plant - not a likely choice. So it buys green-tags. Same pollution, but company number one gets millions for selling its green tags, and the directors all get million-dollar Christmas bonuses. Some will say "Eventually things will change", but why wait for "eventually"? Wouldn't the world be better off if we just legally required companies that emit too much to spend the money on equipment to fix the problem, now?



Download Our iPhone App

Stay up to date on the latest news of the future of science and technology from your iPhone with full articles, images and offline viewing



Follow Us On Twitter

Featuring every article from the magazine and website, plus links from around the Web. Also see our PopSci DIY feed



Become a Fan On Facebook

Share links with friends, comment on stories and more


December 2009: Best of What's New

In our December issue, Popular Science names the 100 best innovations of the year: bombproof wallpaper, self-parking cars, the fastest helicopter, and 97 more. Plus inventor profiles and videos.

Check out the best of what's new here.

Popular Science Photo Pool


Share your photos in the Pop Sci pool at www.flickr.com!
tags_sprite.png
POP_embeddedForm_cover_May09.jpg