2009: The Year in Science

2009 was a busy year for science. Computer science researchers have progressed in their quest for alternatives to traditional transistor based computing. Technological powerhouses like Google have been looking for ways to streamline internet browsing and governments around the world are beginning to dip their fingers into the untamed internet. We’ve began smashing particles together with more force than ever before, thanks to the Large Hadron Collider and we’re detangling the genomes of an ever growing number of animals. But 2009 will probably be most known for environmental research: the science of climate change.

While the debate over global warming heated up this year (sorry), energy conservation became more popular as technology became mainstream, and innovation blossomed out of financial necessity. Though 2009 did not see as much growth in wind energy as previous years, it did see growth in hybrid vehicle markets (well, slightly more than traditional autos anyway), perhaps since driving a hybrid no longer necessitated driving an ugly car. But green technology is a lot more than wind turbines and hybrid cars; people are finding ways to get energy from unexpected sources. Some new ideas show promise, like genetically engineered microbes mutated into fuel producers or ocean wave energy farms. Other more traditional alternatives did not work out as well, like the failed geothermal energy plants here and in Europe and new nuclear power plants that raise safety concerns.

Governments, heeding the dire warnings of much of the scientific community, also stepped up efforts to prevent climate change. Well, at least there was talk of stepping up environmental efforts to curb emissions. While massive government spending in the face of the economic downturn did send some money into green technologies, that same economy derailed any attempts for tougher regulation of emissions. The Copenhagen climate talks seemed to dissolve when Western countries, fearful of overburdening a recovering economy, balked at regulations that might cripple business. And we are left in just about the same position we were in before any worldwide cooperatives.

Maybe governments are weary of taking action as the climate debate is still in full Crescendo. Indeed, the global warming argument seems to be the Scopes monkey trial of the twenty first century, with the public polarized on the issue and to a much lesser degree, the scientific community as well.  And like evolution, hardcore members in either camp will probably never be persuaded to change sides, no matter what evidence becomes available.
Unfortunately, the collateral damage of debating global warming was to the credibility of the scientific method.  Depending upon which news channel you watch, the so-called “climate-gate,” emails stolen from top climate research groups, is either the smoking gun of the global warming hoax, or poorly worded phrases taken completely out of context. At the very least, it showed that some climate reports omitted data, and potentially skewed the report to one side.

So 2009 has been a mixed bag for climate science. The recession has both hindered growth and inspired creativity. Governments have yet to enact real change, but have made commitments to alternative energy. The debate over climate change is far from any resolution, at least among the general population. And while certain scientific institutions have lost credibility, perhaps we can take this opportunity to reinforce transparency in the debate and in science, and hopefully we can allow a natural resolution, objective and free of personal interests, as intended by the scientific method.

Questions and comments: andrewhaynie2009@u.northwestern.edu