Science Cheerleader

Another timely report from Dr. John Ohab.

Hooray! October is Energy Awareness Month, a national effort to empower citizens to reshape the energy economy and be part of the solution to climate change. This year’s theme, “A Sustainable Energy Future; Putting All the Pieces Together”, encourages everyone to see themselves as a piece of the much larger puzzle that includes efforts from the Federal Government, private industry, and the general public.

While scientists and engineers are working to solve many of our energy challenges, there are steps that each of us can take now to lower our emissions while reducing energy and waste disposal costs. For example, the Environmental Protection Agency’s Personal Emissions Calculator can help you measure your own carbon footprint and then take action. The Department of Energy provides an array of low- or no-cost methods specifically geared towards homeowners who want to save energy without compromising their comfort. Google’s Energy Saver Gadget optimizes your computer’s power management settings. The Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Effiency offers a map of utility programs that provide incentives for those who invest in energy efficiency. You can also help by simply spreading the word and making your friends and family aware of their energy consumption.

If protecting the environment, conserving natural resources, saving taxpayer dollars, and creating a better world for our children is not enough incentive, how about a chance to meet The President of the United States? Oh yes!

Last week, President Obama announced the SAVE (Securing Americans Value and Efficiency) Award, which challenges Federal employees to submit practical, environmental-friendly ways of improving government efficiency and savings. Do you have a innovative idea for preserving light bulbs at government facilities? Or how about a brilliant method for reducing the cost of air conditioning?  You have until October 14, 2009, to submit your ideas for consideration in the fiscal year 2011 Budget. In November, the winner will have the opportunity to present his or her idea to President Obama himself. Stay tuned for news on whether you will also be drinking beers with him.

I’ll return with more Energy Awareness Month reports throughout the next few weeks, including some behind-the-scenes video interviews with speakers, sponsors, and others attending the four-part energy event, The Road to the New Energy Economy. I’m energized — are you?

In this report from Dr. John Ohab, we see how public participation in government activity is but a heartbeat away…in the Executive Branch, that is. Congress still lags far behind. In the coming weeks, I will have an update on the status of our efforts to create a participatory mechanism so the public can become informed–and weigh in–on, science and technology policy issues BEFORE Congress drafts legislation. Some exciting things are underway!
Here’s Dr. John with a report on how YOU can now access government data and mash it up ’till you heart’s content….

In 2008, Vivek Kundra, then-Chief Technology Officer for Washington, D.C, was looking for innovative ways to use information technology to improve the city’s government. He looked no further than its citizens.

In 2008, Vivek Kundra, then-Chief Technology Officer for Washington, D.C, was looking for innovative ways to use information technology to improve the city’s government. He looked no further than its citizens.

Kundra created a public contest called Apps for Democracy, which challenged citizens to create their own software applications using DC government data and popular products like iPhones and Google Maps. For years, the DC Data Catalogue had provided public data on crime, construction projects, and government operations. Apps for Democracy rewarded citizens that could think one step further and develop the most cost-effective, accessible ways of re-packaging this data for use by the general public and the government.

The city invested roughly $50,000 in Apps for Democracy, and in just 30 days, produced 47 software applications with an estimated savings of $2,300,000. The effort was so successful it even spawned a follow-up, Apps for Democracy: Community Edition, which asked citizens to develop applications for submitting online requests for city services. (more…)

Obama and the executive branch move full-steam ahead with plans to restore science to its rightful place in America. Someone wake up Congress, please!

On April 27th 2009, during remarks at the National Academy of Sciences, President Barack Obama announced the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST). PCAST is an advisory group of the nation’s leading scientists and engineers who will advise the President and Vice President and formulate policy in the many areas where understanding of science, technology, and innovation is key to strengthening our economy and forming policy that works for the American people. PCAST is part of the Executive Office of the President and is administered by the Office of Science and Technology Policy.

Watch the video

From the NAS website:

The president challenged NAS members to use their love and knowledge of science to inspire American students to pursue careers in science and engineering. In addition, he urged NAS members to “think about new and creative ways to engage young people in science and engineering, like science festivals, robotics competitions, and fairs that encourage young people to create, build, and invent — to be makers of things, not just consumers of things.”

Obama reiterated his commitment to education and announced a national initiative, “Race to the Top,” designed to improve student achievement in math and science and move U.S. students from the middle of the pack to the top on international benchmarks over the next decade.

Subscriber Judi found this NYTimes article via E-School News. Thanks, Judi!

In ‘Geek Chic’ and Obama, New Hope for Lifting Women in Science

I’ve pulled two particularly interesting findings from the article, followed by one suggestion from the author.

(more…)

Can you feel the earth shaking? It’s from the clamoring of calls to reopen the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment (the OTA provided science policy advice to Congress before Newt Gingrich closed the Office 15 years ago).  Regular readers are aware of my OTA cheer: “Hey, hey, what do you say? Let’s reopen the OTA (with citizen input)!!”  Published two articles in Science Progress,  started a petition, launched a facebook discussion, and just created a mock market where investors can buy or sell stock to indicate their predictions on whether or not an OTA with citizen input will be opened this year. (Stock is tumbling. Good time to buy it!)

Here are two very recent articles on the subject of a new OTA, written by “futurists.” Future thinkers? Eat my dust!

The Future of Foresight under Obama and Mission Ahead .  

If you want to learn more about the OTA or read some of their 750+ official reports, check this out, from the Federation of American Scientists. It has to be the most vibrant website dedicated to a non-existent Federal government office.

Obama: ” It is time we once again put science at the top of our agenda and work to restore America’s place as the world leader in science and technology.”

Science bloggers are thrilled, the Science Debate team is giddy, a few folks are cautiously optimistic.
I’m very pleased. In general, Obama’s appointments signal a new era in science policy–transparency and inclusiveness being high on the list. Traditional reservations about Democrats over-investing in a too-broad-a-range of basic research are tempered simply because there’s not much money to go around these days. Most of Obama’s appointments were early supporters of the Science Debate (see below) and ardent advocates of engaging the public in science and science policy discussions.  

Here’s Obama, making the announcements:

Remarks from Shawn Otto, CEO of Science Debate 2008:

In addition to Steven Chu, John Holdren, and Jane Lubchenco, we would like to congratulate Science Debate 2008 supporters Harold Varmus and Eric Lander on being named co-chars of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.  A 1989 Nobel laureate in medicine, Dr Varmus is former director of NIH and president of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, and has been one of our closest and strongest advocates throughout the last year – we are very pleased and proud of his appointment.  Also an early supporter of Science debate 2008, Dr Lander is the Director of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard; the first author of the Human Genome Project, and one of TIME’s 100 most influential people of our time (2004).
America was founded by scientist-statesmen like Jefferson and Franklin. It has always been an important part of our identity and success as a nation. We are hopeful that with these appointments, the American destiny with science can be reengaged to tackle our most pressing challenges as a nation, nearly all of which revolve around questions of science and technology. Now, the next step for the new administration will be successfully communicating this agenda to the American public, and reengaging the American media on these questions which are so critical to our ongoing success as a nation.

Thank you, as always, for supporting our shared effort to encourage this kind of leadership in the American political process. You are are critical part of…

-The team at ScienceDebate2008.com

The National Academy of Engineering (NAE) sent me some cool prizes to share with you. Be among the first five people to post a comment at http://www.engineeringchallenges.org and consider yourself the new owner of a calculator/pen (left) , illuminating pen, sharp looking duffle bag, pedometer or a Science Cheerleader t-shirt.

Oh, be sure to include this in your comment: “I saw this on Science Cheerleader.”

The NAE,  with support from the National Science Foundation, announced the grandest engineering challenges facing us. These “Challenges” present an exciting forecast wrapped in a blanket of harsh, but by no means defeating, reality. Recently, I attended an event at the NAE’s headquarters in Washington, D.C.,  moderated by former ABC and CNN anchor and current PBS host Aaron Brown. Pix below.  Representatives from both the McCain and Obama campaigns were there to address how government can help turned these Grand Challenges into Grand Achievements.

Here’s a brief description of one of the Engineering Challenges:   As loyal readers know, I did not exactly ace every high school science exam.  I had more important critical issues on my mind: pollute the environment with the giant red or blue can of Final Net Hairspray? What to wear for Hands Across America?! And do I dare set a trend by wearing fringe? (I tried. I failed.) Those are my excuses.

But researchers have provided a far more scientific pardon. In part, I can blame the education system.

What does Cap and Trade mean? Where do the candidates say they stand on this particular issue and how do their words compare to their voting histories?

Any mom who used bingo chips to barter babysitting hours will understand this analogy immediately. Take a group of three moms. Give each, say 10 bingo chips. One chip = one hour of babysitting. If Dana asks Joanne to watch her boys for two hours, she must give Joanne two chips. Joanne can ask Tania to watch her girls for one hour but she will lose a chip to Tania.
Need more chips? Sacrifice some nights out, offer to watch some kids and rebuild your chip reserve
Of course, there are some differences between the babysitting chip method and the cap and trade system:
1) In general, when political wonks refer to Cap and Trade they are not organizing babysitting schedules. They are most likely talking about an approach used to control pollution by providing economic incentives for achieving reductions in the emissions of pollutants.

2) Babysitting chips cannot be bought and sold (despite my numerous attempts to do so). Within a cap and trade system, companies are given a limit–capped–on how much they can pollute the environment. Let’s say they are given a limit of 25. That’s 25 points or credits (or chips) a company can use. They are licensed accordingly. They will not be given more chips by the government. As they start to near their cap, they must buy credits (chips) from other companies who have an excess of credits. This is the “trade” part. Trading money for credits. How would a company have an excess of credits? By lowering their pollution output.  In effect, the buyer is paying a charge for polluting, while the seller is being rewarded for having reduced emissions by more than was needed. Thus, in theory, those that can easily reduce emissions most cheaply will do so, achieving the pollution reduction at the lowest possible cost to society.

Both candidates are in favor of a Cap and Trade policy. Read on. (more…)

Today, Popular Science magazine announced a two-week investigative report comparing McCain and Obama’s answers to 14 Science Debate questions to the senator’s voting records “to see if their history matched up with their promises for the future.”

The report,  titled “The Record Behind the Words: Unpacking ScienceDebate2008,” opens with issue number one: Innovation. The Science Debate question posed to the candidate was this: “What policies will you support to ensure that America remains the world leader in innovation?”

How did their answers stack up to their voting histories? Read the brief details here. 

Hint: Popular Science reports, “Not surprisingly, the candidates took the not-so-bold stance of being for innovation. The first bunch of ScienceDebate answers seem well supported by the candidates’ legislative histories. Come back tomorrow when we examine their answers regarding climate change.“ 

Science Cheerleader’s Simple Summary:  Obama is for increasing funds for basic research and education. McCain also supports greater funding for education but also wants to put a man on the moon…and Mars.
Pick me! Pick me! 

Seriously, come back tomorrow. The comparison between the candidates’ answers promises to be more dramatic.