Trump vs. the Energy Dept. - Guess who's Going to Win

Posted by $ CBJ 8 years, 4 months ago to Politics
57 comments | Share | Flag

Energy Department officials are indignantly refusing a request by Trump's transition team for the names of employees working on "climate change." Trump will soon be their boss and control the department's budget. This might be a good time to eliminate the department altogether, and transfer its nuclear weapons work to the Department of Defense.


All Comments

  • Posted by KevinSchwinkendorf 8 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    In Bill Gertz's book, "The China Threat," he stated that the DOE was filled during the Clinton administration with "anti-nuclear activists." Having worked as a civilian contractor for DOE facilities for over 25 years, I can certainly support that statement. The problem is that George W Bush never cleaned house. I suppose that the Sept 11, 2001 attacks, which came only 8 months into his presidency, took first priority, but we are still saddled with those types of people. It used to be that DOE supported "Energy R&D," as it did evolve out of the old Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) (which was split into the Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA) and Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) back in 1975 - ERDA was then made a full cabinet-level organization the next year, the DOE). DOE does some support for nuclear power R&D, but it biggest priority seems to be windmills and solar panels. And, of course, the Stockpile Stewardship Program, which is to continue to certify the safety/reliability of the remaining nuclear weapons stockpile. This program is administered through the country's network of National Labs (e.g., Los Alamos, Lawrence Livermore, Oak Ridge). Nuclear weapon maintenance is not something the military is set up to do. The military is the "end-user," but they are not staffed with nuclear engineers and scientists who are expert in the fields necessary to support these roles. That's where the labs come in.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by dwlievert 8 years, 4 months ago
    It is as obvious as anything one might discern about the manner in which power is "separated" in the federal government, that the power of the purse rests with Ryan and the majority in the House.

    The current situation, at least for the present, is such that there has NEVER been a more opportune time to begin the disbanding of the bureaucracy throught the power of the purse!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by strugatsky 8 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Trump can have a temporary head of the agency (if his nominee is not approved) simply sit on all regulations and block any action. Fully within the power of the head of the agency, if supported by the Executive. After four years of the agency being "dormant," American industry may revolt if the agency is "activated" again. That's one option.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 8 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    There is also the idea of drawing less power on a continuous basis and storing it locally for use by devices that require more power
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 8 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    There are going to be inventions that will solve these problems We don't know what they will be right now of course.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 8 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "Low voltage DC transmission is also subject to higher losses"
    If USB-C follows the same path of regular USB, which was intended for 500mA max but is commonly used for 2A, someone will make a USB-C hairdryer. :)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 8 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "I agree that nuclear is far more dangerous and difficult."
    It is now, but I hope for a breakthrough that makes it safe. Too many people are irrationally averse to the concept that nuclear power could be made safe. It's hard to calculate, but I suspect nuclear is cheaper if you calculate the present value of the stream of costs of storing nuclear waste and compare it to the PV of the future costs of pollution and global warming caused by burning fossil fuels.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 8 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "LEDs require current limiting even on 12v (leds run on 3-4 volts dc), "
    Yes. Even if you put them in series, you always need some current limiting because you cannot trust the I-V curves not to vary.

    I remember when I was a kid things that required DC had wall-warts, which got warm even if they weren't powering things. If you take a modern USB charger, it doesn't get warm when not used, and it's only slightly warm if you pull 2A (hard to do unless you use good USB cables with 24AWG pwr wires) from all its ports.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 8 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "this religious test of "do you believe in climate change"."
    Which is something I have never uttered about any scientific discovery. Personal incredulity does not matter to science.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ohiocrossroads 8 years, 4 months ago
    Rick Perry ran during the primary on a platform of closing down the DOE. I'm hoping this happens. Then the Dept of Indoctrination, OOPS, Education. Then HUD.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ycandrea 8 years, 4 months ago
    OMG! It sounds like a page right out of Atlas Shrigged! "Union of Concerned Scientists"?? Really?? Was Dr. Stadler among them?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 8 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The higher the voltage, the lower the current required for the same power. The lower the current, the smaller the wires you need to carry it with reasonable voltage loss. So called "switching ppower supplies" can transform pretty much any voltage down to that required to run electronic equipment or LED lighting. In your computer are switching power supplies that transform 110vAC into the various DC voltges needed for the mother board in the computer.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 8 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yes, DC is best for inside the device, but you can still use 12V AC inside the house for point-to-point. Then all you need is a bridge rectifier to convert from 12 V AC to 12 V DC and you don't get the power loss issues - which as you point out are a valid concern.

    Microsoft and Google are building entire server farms on 12V. They are eliminating the power supplies and saving themselves 30% on their energy usage. There's no reason homes couldn't be built the same way.

    I also attended a presentation by a guy who runs his entire house (minus heating and cooking) on solar panels. Every appliance he gets is set up to run off 12V and in most cases the size of the device is smaller because they can omit the transformer. He runs on about 24 solar panels because his home is way off the beaten track and the power company wanted nearly $100K to run a line to his house. He did the math and went an entirely different direction.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Joseph23006 8 years, 4 months ago
    Starting at the top when Mr. Perry or whomever assumes the duty as head of the department the firings should begin, consolidation of areas of expertise, and a streamlining of the accountability to the head. The first to go should be those who denied the request, those involved in the coal and oil sections should be sent for OJT at their various areas of 'expertise'. Those who can't be fired can laterally transferred to dead-end jobs without a chance for advancement, see who takes retirement early. Engage real scientists, not the Drs. of Alchemy, to tell the real truth about climate and energy and present the facts and not the frantic hallucinations that change from decade to decade while nothing actually happens.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 8 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I manufacture led lighting for off road vehicles. LEDs require current limiting even on 12v (leds run on 3-4 volts dc), so it doesnt save much of anything to limit current from 120v or 12v down to what the LED uses. Transformer-less current limiting IC's are used for both. Low voltage DC transmission is also subject to higher losses due to wire resistance at higher current levels. Thats why it isnt used for power transmission and Edison lost his ass on promoting it. You might have 12vdc at your solar panels, but 9 v at the other end of the house and need to boost it electronically before it would work well with 12v appliances. I think 12v works well for emergency lighting however, and houses should be wired for at least one outlet in each room.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 8 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I manufacture led lighting for off road vehicles. LEDs require current limiting even on 12v (leds run on 3-4 volts dc), so it doesnt save much of anything to limit current from 120v or 12v down to what the LED uses. Transformer-less current limiting IC's are used for both. Low voltage DC transmission is also subject to higher losses due to wire resistance at higher current levels. Thats why it isnt used for power transmission and Edison lost his ass on promoting it. You might have 12vdc at your solar panels, but 9 v at the other end of the house and need to boost it electronically before it would work well with 12v appliances. I think 12v works well for emergency lighting however, and houses should be wired for at least one outlet in each room.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 8 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    You do know that is the story of fracking, right?

    And I would point out that the biggest problem to getting oil in the US right now isn't technological at all - its governmental. Even though energy production went up during the last eight years, it was because the production was happening on private lands. Obama and co did everything they could to cut off exploration and exploitation on public lands - including denying oil leases in our sovereign waters. And because US companies can't drill, Chinese companies are coming in using horizontal drilling to steal the oil out from under us.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 8 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    To be honest, I think the next big thing in energy is going to be building homes with separate power grids. One track remains on 120 AC and is used for major appliances. You could even use 240 (depending on whether or not one uses and electric range). The other track uses 12 V and is used for lighting and minor appliances - including computers. Most current devices have built-in transformers to cut the voltage from 120 to 12 anyway - especially computers - and this would really cut out some of the costs of moving to LED lighting since right now they have to include the transformers and circuitry with every bulb. If you have a conditioned 12 V system for most of your home needs, you can dramatically cut power consumption simply by eliminating a lot of the inefficiency caused by voltage transformers.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by NealS 8 years, 4 months ago
    Seems like they are jumping to the conclusion that their jobs might be in jeopardy, when he may actually just be looking to interview them for a bigger position. Show me the facts. I love it, keep 'em guessing. The more defense of their jobs that is put up by government employees and contractors, the leaner these departments will get, if not totally abolished.

    I'd like him to do something similar with entitlements (welfare). Make the people collecting it prove the need every year, rather than the government having a bunch of paid personnel trying to disprove or catch them in the act of cheating the system.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 8 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I agree that nuclear is far more dangerous and difficult. I live in las vegas, and the sun is very hot here and works well for hot water generation and swimming pool heating. government regulation, cronyism, and uncertain supply at night and when cloudy makes solar electric generation kind of impractical still. Tesla's home battery idea could get around some of these problems, but its kind of expensive and one needs LARGE batteries to live like we do today. Building for lower energy use can make solar more attractive here, although A/C is the biggest use of energy today.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 8 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Unless someone miraculously gets a real fusion reactor online, it's way simpler and cheaper to use fossil fuels than any other source of energy on the planet. Fissile material is very rare and requires extremely sophisticated refining and hazardous transport before it can even be used. That's not to say it isn't miles better than solar and wind, only a point on its viability. You also have the storage of all the waste which even with newer reactors is still a concern.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo