1. Rod – While I too fully respect Dr. Chu’s scientific abilities and his skill at doing some neat science with lasers, I cannot help but notice that he is more of a politician than a scientist these days. In many ways, he is every bit a politician as the other person you mention.

    Some of the political games being played these days require more than one player. For example, it requires one politician to pull a license application (“with prejudice,” I might add, so that the decision cannot be later reversed) and a second politician to refuse to review the license application in spite of being directed to do so by Congress.

    1. On the public side, we see Dr. Chu talking about energy production, but if you look at what really occupies most of his time (and his agency’s budget) it’s maintaining the surety of our nuclear weapon stockpile. I personally think we should separate the NNSA from DOE so that we can have a cabinet level person focused solely on energy related issues.

      1. On the public side, I hear Dr. Chu talking about painting roofs white and other silly, trivial stuff.

        It’s clear that he is saying what is popular with the folks who have put him in his current office … just like any politician does.

  2. If you read the Matt Wald article in the New York Times, you will discover that there was an energy bill that was passed by the Senate in 2007, which was written by Senator Jeff Bingaman, a Democrat from New Mexico, and which proposed changes to the Department of Energy’s loan guarantee program.

    Nowhere, however, does Wald say that the bill offers $50 billion in loan guarantees to the nuclear industry. All that the changes do is to accelerate the rate at which the Department of Energy is allowed to award loan guarantees that have already been approved.

    If Harvey thinks that he went to D.C. to stop $50 billion in nuclear loan guarantees, then he is greatly mistaken.

    The loan guarantees were already legislated in the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The only change proposed by the new bill was to eliminate the political bottleneck in approving these guarantees, because as the article puts it, “under current law, the government is only allowed to guarantee a volume of loans authorized each year by Congress. Last year, Congress limited the government to awarding just $4 billion in loan guarantees for clean energy projects during the 2007 fiscal year.”

    The $50 billion figure shows up years later. There was an attempt by Senate Republicans to increase the loan guarantees already authorized in 2005 to roughly $50 billion in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Next year, President Obama proposed increasing the loan guarantees to $54 billion in the FY 2011 budget that he submitted to Congress.

    So we see that “no nukes” crowd are not very accurate in their recounting of events. (I’m sure nobody is surprised, given their record.) In Harvey’s case, I’m willing to chalk it up to all the years of smoking pot, but since “$50 billion” appears so often, this figure appears to have taken the role of a shibboleth that is used by the tribe to rally their opposition to nuclear power.

  3. Driving thru Vermont this Labor day week end. A few things have changed alongside Interstate 91 since 1 year ago.

    3 mountain tops have been shaved off and wind mills have made an appearance.

    1 farm has installed approximately 40 solar panels.

    Who’s taking the green out of Vermont ?

Comments are closed.

Recent Comments from our Readers

  1. Avatar
  2. Avatar
  3. Avatar
  4. Avatar
  5. Avatar

Similar Posts