Listen to this Podcast
More 60-Second Earth
[Below is the original script. But a few changes may have been made during the recording of this audio podcast.]
The environment. Finally, it's an election issue. But the candidates' energy plans have some big drawbacks. Here they are:
Obama: The senator backs ethanol, maybe because Illinois has a lot of cornfields. But turning corn into fuel means less food to go around.
McCain: The senator from Arizona wants to build at least 45 more nuclear power plants. And the nuclear waste? Bury it in Nevada.
How about the VPs?
Biden: The senator from Delaware is a fan of clean coal, technologies to capture and permanently store pollution. He also wants to give it to China and India, too. Too bad we don't know if it works.
Palin: Drill, baby, drill, according to Alaska's Governor… from off the coast of Florida to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Caribou and corals be damned, we need oil!
That said, all the candidates except for maybe Palin believe global warming is man-made. And a problem. And all support renewable technologies, such as solar and wind power, that could cut carbon dioxide. That ought to be good for the planet, no matter whom you vote for.
—David Biello
60-Second Earth is a weekly podcast from Scientific American. Subscribe to this Podcast: RSS | iTunes
See what we're tweeting about
5 Comments
Add Comment"But turning corn into fuel means less food to go around. "
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAre you kidding? We have a surplus of corn, thus the ubiquity of "high fructose corn syrup" in everything from fruit bars to ketchup. No one's going to starve if we use corn for fuel.
In response to Godheval:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOne reason for our usage of high fructose corn syrup is that we've propped up the price of sugar in this country via tariffs to protect the American sugar industry. In most countries, you'll notice that the soda tastes better. That's because they use sugar. Normally, sugar is much cheaper (and healthier). If there was such a surplus of sugar here, you'd think that Mexico would use as much high fructose corn syrup as well (considering their proximity to the U.S. and NAFTA), but you don't see that at all.
The ethanol subsidies is one of the reasons we've seen a rise in corn prices worldwide, making it harder for the world's poor to buy food. Granted, other factors contribute as well. One other major factor is the decline in the dollar. This also hurts poorer countries who still have their currencies pegged to the dollar as well.
In response to the whole corn thing, even taking into account statements about food for the poor... Here in the US, approximately two thirds of the population is overweight and approximately one third is obese (obviously included in the overweight category). I think the entire country could stand to cut back on food in general, and starchy foods like corn in particular.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat being said, there are probably better ways to make ethanol. I like the idea of using algae. Also, there is biofuel made from vegetable oil, even used vegetable oil that would otherwise be thrown away. Corn isn't the only available source of green energy out there. They should be looking for more. But in the mean time, using corn is probably a good idea for the short term.
I need to make one correction in my previous comment. When I said, "If there was such a surplus of sugar here, you'd think that Mexico would...", I meant to say, "If there was such a surplus of CORN...", not "sugar". My bad.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAlso, SciAm had an article of biofuels as while back that was interesting:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=biofuels-bad-for-people-and-climate
But remember, when we're talking about the poor, it's not just the poor in the U.S. that are affected by rising prices, but the poor across the world, where obesity certainly isn't the problem that it is here or in certain other industrialized nations.
Although I don't want to sound alarmist, if you listened to Palin being interviewed by Couric, you will hear that it doesn't matter what caused global warming, we just need to fix it. However, if we don't know what caused/causes it, how can we even begin to attempt to change it? Whoever we vote for has to have more than a few brain cells working. I like what they are saying in PoliticalSlavery.com about the choices between the candidates. They are pointing to actual references to what they say, not just using the hype and rhetoric.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this