Comments on: In Confirmation Hearing, Steven Chu Opposes ‘Hard Moratorium’ On Coal And Nuclear Power

By: jal

jal — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 23:19:26 +0000

i love Chu’s enthusiasm and effort into finding ways to save our future. he has inspired me to become just like him one day. the information i looked up for him, for my report is somethin’ else. thank you CHU! :)

By: Oro Lee

Oro Lee — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 05:04:20 +0000

Rotten fruit, I think:

Chu indicated that he believes the more productive focus for the United States government than a coal moratorium is in a heavy emphasis on energy efficiency and conservation, with a commitment to limiting energy demand.

1. Energy effeciency and conservation do not move us off a fossil fuel diet — they keep the cost of fuel down (effectively increasing the supply) which will drive increased consumption.

2. Exactly how is energy demand limited? By rationing? By taxes? How about limiting supply, like, no more coal plants? No more nukes?

Increased energy effeciency and conservation ameliorate the effect of reduced fossil fuel, energy production while the transition is made to sustainable, green energy production — and leaves us a world to live in when (if?) we get there.

As we know, while a candidate may say one thing and do the opposite once in office, the same happens with those subject to Senate confirmation (the present AG?). Probably some of that going on in most of these hearings.

By: jps

jps — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:21:59 +0000

The key issue for coal and nuclear is cleanup. As in, on isle nine. Right now we have these cesspools of ash, they need to be neutralized without releasing the carbon, so, compress and contain them — attempt to solidify. In order to build more coal or nuclear instead of more wind, we have to show that we are solidifying and neutralizing a significant amount of waste without letting the carbon escape into the air, because we can use that for plastics.

By: Andy

Andy — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:20:27 +0000

The key issue for all people talking about nuclear power is *transport*. Trains or trucks, whichever one it is, the high and low level waste has to travel. Every last policy maker, bureaucrat and politician has to be asked if they want it heading down the freeway in *their* district/by their kids’ school. If the answer is no, then we absolutely cannot build them. It is absolute insanity.

By: Ted

Ted — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:31:48 +0000

Low hanging fruit first.

By: Dave

Dave — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 15:38:56 +0000

Repeat after me, “low hanging fruit first”.

Dr. Chu is at a confirmation hearing in front of the most parochial group in the world. He manages to finesse the coal and nuclear issue and speak directly to the fruit pickers.

Chu indicated that he believes the more productive focus for the United States government than a coal moratorium is in a heavy emphasis on energy efficiency and conservation, with a commitment to limiting energy demand.

That’s the fruit, the orchard and the farm right there. That’s jobs in every Congressional district, that’s more comfortable houses for the people in the LIHEAP program who have served as conduits for subsidies to the energy industry, and most of all, it sets the table for a lower demand environment in which wind, solar, geothermal, and other technologies can more easily help meet demand.

This is progress in a big way. Don’t underestimate this man or this strategy.