Feb
3
3
The Editor's Blog
Science And Public Policy
Posted by Rudy Baum on February 3, 2010 in The Editor's Blog
Critics of this page frequently argue that C&EN’s editor-in-chief should comment only on matters concerning chemistry or the chemical industry. There is no place, they argue, in the American Chemical Society’s newsmagazine for commentary on public policies about which ACS members might disagree. The magazine, in fact, should stay out of public policy issues altogether, in the view of some of these critics.
The stories in this week’s issue of C&EN illustrate why this criticism is unrealistic in today’s world. The first seven department stories—from the cover story to both stories in the Business Department, both stories in the Government & Policy Department, the single story in the Science & Technology Department, and even the first story in the ACS News Department—all deal with issues that have a public policy component to them. Science and technology and public policy are inextricably linked in modern societies.
For example, the cover story, “Fluorochemicals Go Short” by Senior Correspondent Steve Ritter, is a comprehensive examination of the development of a policy for dealing with two particularly persistent long-chain perfluoroalkyl compounds: PFOS and PFOA. As an interim measure, chemical companies, with EPA’s blessing, are replacing PFOS and PFOA with compounds with shorter perfluoroalkyl chain groups that impart the same functional properties as the longer chain compounds. “Although the alternatives are just as persistent, they aren’t as bioaccumulative and appear to have a better toxicity profile—which is still being confirmed by testing—and are thus considered sound replacements,” Ritter writes.
Celebrating ACS Scholars
Jan
26
26
Posted by Rudy Baum on January 26, 2010 in The Editor's Blog
The American Chemical Society Scholars Program celebrates its 15th anniversary in 2010. The program awards renewable scholarships of up to $5,000 per year to underrepresented minority students who want to enter chemistry or chemical engineering or related fields such as environmental science, toxicology, and chemical technology.
As part of the 15th anniversary celebration, C&EN is launching in this issue a series of profiles of current and former ACS Scholars. The profiles will run in the last issue of each month.
The first profile is of Steven W. Meier, who is a member of the Citizen Potawatomi Nation, an American Indian tribe with its headquarters in Shawnee, Okla. (see page 41). Meier was an ACS Scholar at Rice University. He received a bachelor’s degree in chemical engineering from Rice, went on to receive his Ph.D. in chemical engineering from Northwestern University, and is now at ExxonMobil R&D in Annandale, N.J.
Through the year, C&EN will tell 12 of these inspirational stories. There are many, many more. The ACS Scholars Program, which won the 2001 Presidential Award for Excellence in Science, Mathematics & Engineering Mentoring and the 1997 American Society of Association Executives Award of Excellence, has aided more than 1,900 students since its inception.
After Copenhagen
Jan
11
11
Posted by Rudy Baum on January 11, 2010 in The Editor's Blog
The United Nations-sponsored climate conference held in December in Copenhagen was neither the groundbreaking success proclaimed by President Barack Obama and other world leaders nor the abject failure gleefully denigrated by climate-change skeptics.
C&EN Senior Correspondent Cheryl Hogue attended the entire conference and, with assistance from Senior Correspondent Jeff Johnson here in Washington, reported on it in several News of the Week stories (Dec. 14, 2009, pages 6 and 7; Dec. 21, 2009, pages 6 and 7; and Jan. 4, page 8). Hogue’s comprehensive wrapup from the conference appears in this week’s issue (see page 27).
As Hogue points out, negotiations in Copenhagen “yielded little. They were stymied not only by shifting geopolitical dynamics but also by procedural maneuvers that stifled consensus and by disruptions from the unprecedented number of people observing the proceedings.”
That’s a nice way of saying that the conference was a mess. As Hogue suggests, it has now become likely that a UN-sponsored, worldwide agreement to limit greenhouse gas emissions is unattainable. Climate-change skeptics are elated by this development, but they should not be.
Farewell 2009
Dec
23
23
Posted by Rudy Baum on December 23, 2009 in The Editor's Blog
This is C&EN’s last issue of the year. In years past, the cover story in this issue has been our “Chemical Year in Review,” a look at some of the seminal research advances in chemistry and related disciplines covered in C&EN during the year. This issue does contain the “Chemical Year in Review” for 2009, but it is the lead Science & Technology Department story.
The cover story focuses on the science behind the debate on global warming and climate change by Senior Correspondent Stephen K. Ritter. The image on the cover, from NASA, shows the Arctic ice conditions at the end of the melt season in 2007. It was the lowest extent of Arctic sea ice on record; an open Northwest Passage is visible. The image was produced from sea ice observations collected by the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer on NASA’s Aqua satellite overlaid on the NASA Blue Marble, the most detailed and accurate series of color images of Earth.
“Global Warming and Climate Change” is a major story, more than 8,000 words over nine pages, that Ritter has been working on for several months. Regular readers of C&EN know my opinions about global warming. However, in late summer I asked Ritter, one of C&EN’s most rigorous, objective, and experienced science reporters, to look carefully at the criticisms leveled against the idea that human activities are causing Earth’s climate to change. I asked him to talk to scientists on both sides of the debate and prepare a fair assessment of where the science is today. I believe he has accomplished that assignment admirably. I hope you find the story useful in the evolution of your understanding of this great problem facing the world.
More “Climategate”
Dec
17
17
Posted by Rudy Baum on December 17, 2009 in The Editor's Blog
At the Yale Forum on Climate Change & the Media, Zeke Hausfather has an excellent analysis of the contents of the e-mails that were hacked from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in the U.K. Climate change skeptics and deniers have been trying to use a few of the e-mails to argue that climate scientists have been covering up data and suppressing dissenting views, and they’ve taken to calling it whole situation “climategate.”
Hausfather writes: “These e-mails provide plenty to criticize, but the most widely-publicized quotes often are taken out of context to falsely imply a conspiracy of sorts to hide declining temperatures and a lack of recent warming. A close reading of the e-mails in question reveals a more nuanced picture, with scientists struggling with how to explain uncertainties in complex systems in a world of 60-second sound-bytes and the certainty of blistering condemnations by those ideologically opposed to accepting scientific evidence of anthropogenic warming.”
From Rio to Copenhagen
Dec
14
14
Posted by Jerry Schnoor on December 14, 2009 in Copenhagen 2009, The Editor's Blog
I’m on my way to Copenhagen, 17 and a half years since attending my first meeting on climate change in Rio de Janeiro (June, 1992). President George H. W. Bush came (briefly) to that meeting, although the U.S. was certainly not a leader in pushing for hard limits on greenhouse gas emissions. But we did sign the agreement, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the Senate ratified our intention to limit emissions (sometime) in the future. It’s the future now and, unfortunately, prospects have not improved.
To me, the evidence is massive that climate is changing rapidly and that humans are to blame. Considering the disappearance of Arctic ice and continental glaciers, the warming of earth and sea surface temperatures, the increasing frequency of floods and droughts, and the migration patterns of birds and animals — there can be little doubt that the earth is warming fast. That this warming coincides with man-made emissions into the atmosphere at ever-increasing rates places humans as the cause. Besides, we can calculate the warming effect of the greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere and it explains the warming observed.
These multiple lines of evidence point convincingly that our changing climate is a serious problem. But, still, it’s not possible to see the “smoking gun” in man’s hand directly causing the effects. Many people, even on my own faculty, insist that the changes are small, probably naturally occurring, and not a priority for action. For the first time, I’m resigned to respecting their dissenting opinion and to strategizing how to move on and make progress anyway. It’s time to show some resolve and to decrease our emissions.
Of course, the rebuttal to the skeptics’ argument is that human-caused emissions will exacerbate and accelerate any natural warming that is occurring. It makes the case even more compelling to take action now. It’s a fact (not a theory) that greenhouse gases absorb back-radiation from the earth and trap heat in the earth’s atmosphere. It’s a fact (not a theory) that our fossil fuel emissions are responsible for the incremental greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
So after seventeen and a half years, I’ve come to the conclusion that (no matter what) we cannot convince everyone that climate change is a problem. To them, it’s not a high priority for which we should invest precious resources. But at Copenhagen (and later in the U.S. Senate), we can move forward through leadership of the Obama administration. We’ve waited long enough.
We can gather a consensus on energy efficiency, conservation and renewable energy – actions which save money, create jobs, provide for energy security, and improve public health. Proof of the wisdom of such actions is everywhere evident in prosperous, sustainable Denmark. In addition, we must reach out now to poor countries who are disproportionately affected by climate change. And within the U.S., we must forge a consensus wherever it exists.
I’ve given up hope for U.S. leadership on the global stage. Now, I just yearn to see some forward progress. That’s the hope for Copenhagen. It’s not all that I envisioned in Rio in 1992, but it’s time to get started.
Global Warming Continues
Dec
10
10
Posted by Rudy Baum on December 10, 2009 in The Editor's Blog
With apologies to Michael Mann, here’s a video that shows that global warming skeptics both, a) have a sense of humor, and, b) have a fair amount of time on their hands.
On the serious side, though, the “decline” that is the heart of this cute little ditty and video isn’t all the skeptics are cracking it up to be. No one denies that global temperatures, measured by a variety of methods, have declined slightly over the past decade.
That said, 1998 was the warmest year in recorded history. So the decline, which climate scientists attribute to a number of factors, is from a very high starting point. And every year since 1998, while slightly cooler than that benchmark year, has been one of the warmest years in history.
In fact, according to the World Meteorological Organization, the decade from 2000 to 2009 is the warmest in the modern record, and 2009 “is likely to rank in the top 10 warmest on record.” According to WMO, “This year [2009] above-normal temperatures were recorded in most parts of the continents. Only North America (U.S. and Canada) experienced conditions that were cooler than average. Given the current figures, large parts of southern Asia and central Africa are likely to have the warmest year on record.”
WMO also states that, “The decade of the 2000s (2000-2009) was warmer than the decade spanning the 1990s (1990-1999), which in turn was warmer than the 1980s (1980-1989). Does anyone sense a trend here?
Climate Change & Climategate
Dec
10
10
Posted by Rudy Baum on December 10, 2009 in Copenhagen 2009, The Editor's Blog
More than 30,000 people are gathered in Copenhagen to discuss, negotiate, and act on global warming. A treaty to control the emission of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide is not likely to come out of this UN meeting, but progress toward such a treaty is. The amount of money developed nations should contribute to developing nations to help them adapt to the global warming that is already inevitable is another major topic being discussed. C&ENtral Science is carrying blog postings from Senior Correspondent Cheryl Hogue, ES&T Editor-in-chief Jerald Schnoor, and others attending the Copenhagen meeting.
Meanwhile, climate change skeptics and deniers are all atwitter about thousands of purloined e-mails and other documents from a computer at the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit (CRU). They have culled through the e-mails, some of them nearly two decades old, and found what they have proclaimed to be paydirt: clear examples in their collective mind of climate change researchers cooking data, suppressing contrary research, and sullying the peer-review process.
They’re calling it “climategate,” of course.
(The e-mails are posted at a number of sites. One of the most convenient to use is http://www.eastangliaemails.com.)
(more…)
Innovation
Dec
8
8
Posted by Rudy Baum on December 8, 2009 in Ripped From the Pages, The Editor's Blog
We take it as a given that innovation is good. We also take for granted that the U.S. has always had a knack for being innovative, and that that knack is an important factor in the remarkable prosperity this nation has long enjoyed.
But what is innovation exactly? Why has the U.S. been good at it? Is the U.S. losing its innovative bent, at least relative to up-and-coming nations such as China? How does a country foster its innovative capacity?
These were some of the questions addressed at the two-day “Innovation Economy Conference” held last week in Washington, D.C. The conference was sponsored by the Aspen Institute, Intel, Democracy, and “The News Hour with Jim Lehrer.” The program featured industry leaders such as Intel President and CEO Paul S. Otellini and GE Chairman Jeffrey R. Immelt, government officials such as Education Secretary Arne Duncan, academic leaders such as Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute President Shirley Ann Jackson, and thought leaders such as Aspen Institute President and CEO Walter Isaacson. Panels during the conference were moderated by “News Hour” correspondents.
One panel during the conference that should be of particular interest to C&EN readers focused on “Are We Doing Enough To Support Science in America?” and featured ACS Executive Director and CEO Madeleine Jacobs, NIH Director Francis S. Collins, and Columbia University physics professor Brian Greene, who is also the founder of the World Science Festival.
Inherently Safer
Nov
24
24
Posted by Rudy Baum on November 24, 2009 in The Editor's Blog
As reported in last week’s issue of C&EN (page 6), the House of Representatives has passed legislation that “would significantly expand the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) authority to regulate security practices at thousands of facilities nationwide that produce, use, or store chemicals.”
The American Chemical Society worked to ensure that the Chemical & Water Security Act of 2009 (H.R. 2868) was structured in a way that advanced innovation and safety. In taking this position, ACS parted company to some extent with chemical industry trade associations like the Society of Chemical Manufacturers & Affiliates, which represents primarily small- and medium-sized batch chemical manufacturers. SOCMA and other trade groups oppose H.R. 2868 because, among other provisions, it gives DHS the authority to require implementation of inherently safer technologies (IST) to reduce the potential consequences of a terrorist attack.
IST mandated by a federal agency is anathema to the chemical industry. The industry argues that it already incorporates the principles of IST into its design of processes and plants and that it is in a much better position to balance risks and improve safety than is a government official. The industry fears that some chemicals essential to certain processes will be banned because they are perceived as highly toxic and dangerous. It also argues that an IST mandate will result in negative, unintended consequences, such as product shortages.
In the lead-up to the House vote on the bill, a number of compromises were struck. Only companies in the so-called Tier 1 and Tier 2 risk categories—the riskiest of four tiers—are covered by the IST mandate. The bill instructs DHS to establish separate standards and procedures for academic labs, a provision supported by ACS.
Recent Comments