| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 11/22 |
| 2006/1/31-2/1 [Science/GlobalWarming] UID:41628 Activity:low |
1/31 "Bush offered a proposal aimed at ending U.S. dependence on foreign oil."
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/31/bush.sotu/index.html
Uh oh. I hope the oil execs don't get too pissed and do
a JFK. Anyways, Bush vowed to increased R&D by 22% to use alternative
energy. What are some research company stocks I should buy
tomorrow? Please respond ASAP before 8AM EST. Thanks.
\_ He's offered a "plan to end dependence on foreign oil" in every
SOTU of his presidency. We've gone from a little over half of our
oil coming from foreign sources to 2/3 in that time.
\_ They give $500 mil to the ethanol people and call that alternative
energy research even though it's bullshit. (So... ADM?)
\_ 22% increase in DOE clean energy research is still pretty much
nothing. Coal-fired plants and ethanol? Sounds like the same old
same old. -tom
\- i dont think it is "nothing". theDoE has been ramping up
energy research for more than a year now. lots of people
are being sucked into "solving the energy crisis" from
other fields [like director chu, jay keasling, for two
local people]. they already saw the funding writing on the wall
going back at least a year and have stated that is their big
initiative [as computational science, gene sequencing,
nanotechnology etc have been in the recent past]. the reseach
program has broadened a lot beyond airy-fairy plasma research,
burying nuclear waste in yucca mtn.
\_ Looking at the budgets at
http://www.energy.gov/about/budget.htm, all the programs
Bush talks about don't add up to $1 billion. So we're
talking about $200 million at most, or three orders of
magnitude less than the cost of the Iraq debacle. The
reason he said 22% instead of giving the dollar amount is
because the dollar amount is so paltry. (Overall DOE budget
is $24 billion, with the majority of that being nuclear
cleanup and weapons programs). -tom
\_ Bullshit. Show me the labs. Or the budget items. I also
work at a national lab, and I say you're talking out of
your ass.
\_ Remember the 2003 SOTU? Remember the "hydrogen" initiative?
\- see e.g. http://www.lbl.gov/solar note: i am not saying
this is a state of the union initiative. it pre-dates the
speech tonight. i am saying in govt science funding
community and other people in scientific leadership positions
this has become a bigger priority. i certainly wouldnt be
surprised if the BUSCHO initiative was pork to oil/car/agri
industries. see also http://www.lbl.gov/Publications/Director
note all of his talks there deal with energy or science educ
and not say optics.
\_ People in "scientific leadership positions" are simply not
listened to by the people who control the money. Why
do I say this? Because I work in a field that is largely
concerned with the interaction of photons and electrons--
nanoelectronics--and no one, repeat:no one is getting any
money in my field to do solar research. The top priority
is quantum computing by far, with NASA detector research
next down. We're spending hundreds of millions on quantum
computing, it's totally dominating as a priority in
solid state and atomic physics right now. How the FUCK is
this a higher priority than energy? I don't know, but
it is.
\- ok, i have been a bit surprised at how much of this is
going to bio and chem people rather than material
science/solid state physics etc. but that may in
part be some of this is driven by carbon management
and environmental factors rather than energy production
in the narrow sense [plasma or building better nuke
reactors etc]. i am not saying this is a "manhattan
project" or a tidal wave, but i think there is
definitely a detectable wave in the area of
energy securty with an eye to medium horizon
less dep on oil rather than just global warming.
between the enviro factors and the dependence
factor i think the impeduts to do soemthign has
gone beyond the tree huggers.
\_ Oh, yeah, I'll agree with you that it's gone far
beyond tree huggers, but I think the private sector
is where the action is, and that the gov't is
still not doing enough right now. I also have my
own personal axe to grind, since I think QC research
is a bit retarded.
\- re: private industry: arguably the barrier to
the private solution are indirect subsidies
to the oil indstryy [in the large ... including
things the the govt dredging channels so oil
can be moved on ships etc] ... so if consumers
faced a more honest cost for oil, that demand
stumuli would be more effective than minor
amounts of research funding. [i dont have a
sense if nuclear is also indirectly subsidized
by the govt not requiring private firms to
fully account for risk, or waste disposal costs,
but i would expect it is]. BTW, i frankly think
conservation is silly. that just keeps things
cheep for the non-conservers. that's roughly
analogous to "if you think taxes are too low,
feel free to send the govt some extra money".
QC research isnt as retarded as sending
people to mars/moon etc.
\_ I agree with you on all points. Have you ever
read Cradle to Cradle or Natural Capitalism?
\- no, i've just heard some talk by that
ALOVINS fellow. to go back to foreign policy
and energy policy for a moment, i think an
interesting foreign policy driver will be
china and maybe india's apparoach to locking
up bilateral energy deals rather than the
global mkt for energy approach the US has
sort of championed. it has been done in the
past on a small scale [like my parent built
a LNG plant in ACEH PROVINCE with japanese
money in exchange for some kind of prefer-
ential sales deal to japan] but i am
wondering if the US is going to decide
oil nations are not "allowed" to make
those kinds of "futures contracts".
\_ NASA's entire budget has been raided to
send people to the moon. Science (includes
earth science) and technology have been hurt
the most. This manned spaceflight directive is
proving to be a disaster. However, let's
not kid ourselves. All the real money goes
to the DoD and DOE. We can't spend money on
research and technology when we are spending
all we have in Iraq. There's your energy
policy right there: go take oil from the
Middle East at any cost. By the way, a lot
of solar energy research is done by NASA
for obvious reasons. |
| 11/22 |
|
| www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/31/bush.sotu/index.html WASHINGTON (CNN) -- On the heels of a politically tough year, President Bush used his State of the Union speech Tuesday to propose weaning the United States from its "addiction" to imported oil and studying how the baby boom generation may strain federal entitlements. The president also spent a good deal of his address on the US-led war in Iraq, efforts to fight terrorism and Iran's nuclear program. An instant CNN/USA Today/Gallup opinion poll of people who watched the speech found that more than half reacted positively. Watch a slideshow of the highlights of the speech) Bush also offered a proposal aimed at ending US dependence on foreign oil as more Americans express concern about the rising cost of gasoline and home heating fuel. Watch the president describe America's 'serious' addiction to oil -- 2:20) "Tonight, I announce the Advanced Energy Initiative -- a 22 percent increase in clean energy research at the Department of Energy, to push for breakthroughs in two vital areas," Bush said. "To change how we power our homes and offices, we will invest more in zero-emission, coal-fired plants; "We will increase our research in better batteries for hybrid and electric cars, and in pollution-free cars that run on hydrogen. We will also fund additional research in cutting-edge methods of producing ethanol, not just from corn but from wood chips, stalks,or switch grass." Full story) To produce the technicians that might bolster such energy research, Bush also called for a federal education initiative "to double the federal commitment to the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences over the next 10 years." "This funding will support the work of America's most creative minds as they explore promising areas such as nanotechnology, supercomputing, and alternative energy sources." That commitment would also make "permanent the research and development tax credit, to encourage bolder private-sector investment in technology," he said. On the international front, Bush invited Americans to choose action over isolationism in his policy against tyranny and to strengthen US economic ties with other nations. "We will choose to act confidently in pursuing the enemies of freedom -- or retreat from our duties in the hope of an easier life," Bush said. "We will choose to build our prosperity by leading the world economy -- or shut ourselves off from trade and opportunity." Instant poll In interviews with 464 adult Americans who watched the speech, 48 percent said they had a very positive reaction. That's well short of the three-quarters of viewers who reacted favorably to Bush's 2002 State of the Union address. Twenty-seven percent of Tuesday's viewers said they had a somewhat favorable reaction to the speech, while 23 percent said they felt negatively about it. See the poll results) The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percentage points. Because the poll reflects the opinions of only those who watched the State of the Union, it reflects more favorable opinions than a random sampling of the country as a whole. The audience was 43 percent Republican, 23 percent Democratic and 34 percent Independent. War in Iraq The president was optimistic about the war in Iraq that has claimed more than 2,200 US troops since March of 2003. International points) "The road to victory is the road that will take our troops home," Bush said. "As we make progress on the ground, and Iraqi forces increasingly take the lead, we should be able to further decrease our troop levels -- but those decisions will be made by our military commanders, not by politicians in Washington, DC" And the president also focused attention on Iraq's neighbor Iran, which US and European officials suspect is using a civilian nuclear power program to develop nuclear weapons. Iran is "defying the world with its nuclear ambitions -- and the nations of the world must not permit the Iranian regime to gain nuclear weapons," Bush said. Transcript) According to a CNN count, the president was interrupted by applause 64 times, one of those interruptions coming from the Democratic side of the aisle when he said: "Congress did not act last year on my proposal to save Social Security. " Bush's longest applause lasted 52 seconds, for his mention of war veteran Daniel Clay. Baby boomer retirement Bush announced initiatives on entitlement issues in the wake of his Social Security private accounts proposal, which failed to gain popular support. "Tonight, I ask you to join me in creating a commission to examine the full impact of baby boom retirements on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid," Bush said. "This commission should include members of Congress of both parties, and offer bipartisan answers. We need to put aside partisan politics, work together and get this problem solved." Hurricane Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast and the government's response hurt the administration politically. That, a lobbying scandal on Capitol Hill and rising discontent over US involvement in wars abroad has lowered Bush's approval rating to 43 percent in a recent CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll. New court judge Bush took the rostrum in the House chamber during a significant political shift in the Supreme Court. Earlier on Tuesday, the GOP-dominated Senate voted to approve his nominee Samuel Alito, who was sworn in just months after the president's first pick to the high court, John Roberts, assumed the role of chief justice. Full story) He recognized the Supreme Court's "two superb new members, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Sam Alito." Delivering a Democratic response Tuesday was the moderate governor of Virginia, Tim Kaine, who defeated a Bush-backed candidate in November. Full story) "The federal government should serve the American people," Kaine said. "But that mission is frustrated by this administration's poor choices and bad management. Watch Gov Kaine call for a better way -- 10:43) "Families in the Gulf Coast see that as they wait to rebuild their lives. Americans who lose their jobs see that as they look to rebuild their careers. And our soldiers in Iraq see that as they try to rebuild a nation. I want to offer some good news tonight -- there is a better way." Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa delivered a Democratic rebuttal in Spanish. CNN's Dana Bash and Suzanne Malveaux contributed to this report. |
| www.energy.gov/about/budget.htm Link: Energy home page Biological Sciences Carbon Sequestration Chemical Science Climate Change More... Clean Air, Soil & Water Climate Change Facilities Oversight More... Annual Energy Outlook Annual Energy Review Ask An Expert Cyber Security Facility Security Nuclear Security Intelligence & Counterterrorism More... Chemical Safety Chronic Berylium Disease Facility Safety Nuclear Safety More... |
| www.lbl.gov/solar -> www.lbl.gov/solar/ Sustainable energy: The most important scientific challenge we face today It's not going to be easy, and it's not going to happen overnight, but at least some of the solutions to one of humanity's greatest problems may be found at Berkeley Lab. Somewhere among the Lab's collaborative blend of biologists, chemists, materials scientists, physicists, and computer scientists could lie a way to obtain a sustainable, CO2-neutral source of energy. "This is the most important scientific challenge we face today," said Lab Director Steve Chu, speaking at a two-day meeting held at Berkeley Lab in March 2005. The meeting was convened to map the challenges that must be overcome to efficiently convert solar energy into fuel or electricity. Deputy Director Graham Fleming, an international authority on ultrafast processes, including photosynthesis, organized the meeting, which drew several dozen scientists from across the Lab and other institutions. "If we can make solar energy an organic part of our thinking at the Lab," Chu said, "we can come up with broad, coordinated solutions to the energy problem. A harrowing list of statistics underscores the need to quickly wean the world from fossil fuels. Pre-industrial concentration of atmospheric CO2, a greenhouse gas, was 280 parts per million. Energy production and use account for 80 percent of greenhouse gas emissions. And, if that were not enough, world production of oil and gas is predicted to peak within 10 to 40 years. Although energy conservation and efficiency can buy some time, fossil fuels won't last forever. Solar-to-Fuel: Catalyzing the Science A report from Science@Berkeley Lab (By Paul Preuss) LBNL Solar-to-Fuel Workshop March 28 and 29, 2005 In April 2005, DOE/BES held a national workshop on basic research needs for solar energy use. To prepare LBNL with a focused strategy for this workshop, Lab director Steve Chu convened a 1 1/2 day meeting to define our goals and determine areas where the Lab has a leading edge and is likely to make contributions that cannot be equaled elsewhere. The workshop focused on the challenge of achieving a carbon-neutral energy solution through the conversion of solar energy into chemical fuel. This conversion may be through a sequence of solar to electrical to chemical storage or through a direct solar to chemical path. |
| www.lbl.gov/Publications/Director -> www.lbl.gov/Publications/Director/ Berkeley Lab > About the Director Steve Chu, Sixth Director of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory IMAGE: Steve Chu Steve Chu, 57, became Berkeley Lab's sixth Director on August 1, 2004. A Nobel Prizewinning scholar and international expert in atomic physics, laser spectroscopy, biophysics and polymer physics, Dr. Chu oversees the oldest and most varied of the Department of Energy's multi-program research laboratories. Berkeley Lab has an annual budget of more than $520 million and a workforce of about 4,000. His distinguished career in laboratory research began as a postdoctoral fellow in physics at the University of California's Berkeley campus from 1976-78, during which time he also utilized the facilities of Berkeley Lab. His first career appointment was as a member of the technical staff at AT&T Bell Laboratories in Murray Hill, NJ where, from 1978-87, his achievements with laser spectroscopy and quantum physics became widely recognized. During the last four years there he was Head of the Quantum Electronics Research Department, during which time he began his groundbreaking work in cooling and trapping atoms by using laser light. In 1987, he became a professor in the Physics and Applied Physics Departments at Stanford University, where he continued his laser cooling and trapping work. This work eventually led to the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1997, an honor he shared with Claude Cohen- Tannoudji of France and United States colleague William D Phillips. Their discoveries, focusing on the so-called "optical tweezers" laser trap, were instrumental in the study of fundamental phenomena and in measuring important physical quantities with unprecedented precision. Chu was the Theodore and Francis Geballe Professor of Physics and Applied Physics at Stanford University, where he remained for 17 years as highly decorated scientist, teacher and administrator. While at Stanford, he chaired the physics department from 1990-93 and from 1999-2001. He is a member of the National Academy of Sciences, American Philosophical Society, American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Academia Sinica, and Honorary Lifetime member, Optical Society of America. He is also a foreign member of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Korean Academy of Sciences and Technology. Chu has won dozens of awards in addition to the Nobel Prize, including the Science for Art Prize, Herbert Broida Prize for Spectroscopy, Richtmeyer Memorial Prize Lecturer, King Faisal International Prize for Science, Arthur Schawlow Prize for Laser Science, and William Meggers Award for Laser Spectroscopy. He was a Humboldt Senior Scientist and a Guggenheim Fellow and has received 6 honorary degrees. He maintains a vigorous research program and directly supervises a team of graduate students and postdoctoral fellows. He is author or coauthor of more than 160 articles and professional papers, and over two dozen former members of his group are now professors at leading research universities around the world. Receiving the Nobel Prize IMAGE: Steven Chu in the lab To Catch an Atom If you ever get the feeling that life is a blur, maybe it's because the atoms that make up the world around us are always moving at speeds faster than those of supersonic jet planes (about 4,000 kilometers per hour). By cooling an atom down to a temperature of nearly absolute zero (-273 degrees Celsius), you can slow its movement to a crawl and then use light to trap and manipulate it. That's what physicist Steven Chu, the new director of Berkeley Lab, did to win a share of the 1997 Nobel Prize in physics. |