by Jim Tankersley
Energy Secretary Steven Chu told a Senate committee this morning that President Barack Obama's budget will include big changes in the structure and direction of energy research, in hopes of producing breakthroughs that could help renewable energy become as cheap as fossil fuels.
Many of the changes mirror recommendations from outside researchers and the department's own scientists, which the Tribune Washington Bureau highlighted in a story on the need for Energy Department changes to better pursue transformational research.
Chu told the Senate Energy Committee that the more detailed version of Obama's budget, due in April, will "improve energy research, development, and deployment at DOE: by developing science and engineering talent; by focusing on transformational research; by pursuing broader, more effective collaborations; and by improving connections between DOE research and private sector energy companies," according to written testimony posted on the committee web site.
He offered several examples of what those breakthroughs might look like: the development of "gasoline and diesel-like biofuels" generated from low-grade biomass such as solid waste and non-food crops; automobile batteries with double or triple the current capacity, which could last 15 years; solar power that costs five times less than current photovoltaics; computer design tools to cut energy use in buildings by up to 80 percent; and systems to store large masses of energy from wind and solar power for use when the wind doesn't blow and the sun does not shine.
Chu also promised to "better integrate national lab, university, and industry research" - and to partner with other nations - in pursuit of those goals. He touted loan programs he said would help renewable energy firms mass-produce and market their products. And he said the budget supports graduate fellowships to help train students in energy fields.
You can read Chu's full testimony.
Comments
Before you attack me, let me just say that Congress/Presidents have talked about this for years.
This Chu, uses words like development, in hope, that could, improve energy research, might look like.. OK that's enough, but I think you get my idea.
All worthy goals, but they don't exist to the point of Energy Independence.
Fossil fuel, natural gas, nuclear (mentioned once) where not mentioned.
We need Independence by using ALL of what we have and what will work now WHILE developing alternative energy, energy that is logical.
Read his entire statement, search for words, because it leaves out a lot. But it sounds good.
Posted by: PG | March 5, 2009 12:15 PM
Support research with exploration for oil off the US coast.
Reduce foreign oil consumption, use American oil and drill off the cost of US and research/develop/find alternative source of energy.
To penalize people during this hunt for an energy solution will drive Obama from office..easily.
Wake up!
Posted by: Rhode | March 5, 2009 12:18 PM
But it will take years until this goal is even conceivable. Until then, the Obama energy plan will be seen as basically a tax hike on consumers.
http://www.political-buzz.com/
Posted by: matt | March 5, 2009 1:29 PM
I'm all for saving the planet, however we have substantial coal deposits, millions, if not billions of barrels of oil off our coasts and tons of oil shale in our country. Would it not be prudent to use these resources, while searching for alternative sources of energy. We have the technology to put a man on the moon, certainly they can find a way to make these fossil fuels cleaner and safer to use.
Posted by: Paul | March 5, 2009 1:52 PM
Let's strip the Earth of all natural resources! Why not suck the planet dry? Why leave anything of our planet to the next generations?
Posted by: lochnessmonster | March 5, 2009 2:25 PM
Hey, Sarah Palin and Rush told me that "drill baby, drill" was going to fix all of our energy problems?
I thought we had this covered!
Posted by: Republican ditto-head | March 5, 2009 3:27 PM
Nukes Now ...
We haven't built a nuke energy plant since well before Obama's invisible man imersonation on the Harvard review... It is safe, clean, renewable and no greenhouse gases to scare the eco-nazis...
Drill like hell now until we can double the amount of Nukes we can get online... this is the only realistic answer to this economies increasing energy demands... the construction and support alone of this effort would create 10s of thousands of jobs...
Posted by: heartburn | March 5, 2009 4:17 PM
"This Chu, uses words like development, in hope, that could, improve energy research, might look like.. OK that's enough, but I think you get my idea." Posted by: PG
Where is Inky? someone needs to interpret this for me, I'm afraid.
This Chu is a Nobel Prize winner.
Posted by: Flo | March 5, 2009 4:24 PM
heartburn- It is the realistic answer but the only thing is that we're a little short on realists these days.
-
We think people hate us now just wait until when or if we ever get energy independant.
Posted by: Rob | March 5, 2009 5:25 PM
“Drill baby drill”, nuclear energy, and mining are viable ways of producing energy. Unfortunately the raw materials necessary for each are all finite in supply. We can either pay now to develop renewable energy and ensure a longer supply of oil, uranium, and coal, or we can just continue to use those non-renewable commodities at an ever accelerating rate thus leaving none for our grandchildren. The latter seems pretty selfish to me.
Posted by: BiomassBlog | March 5, 2009 6:05 PM
Flo,
I had the EXACT same reaction as PG. Dr. Chu did possibly his greatest work at UH, right here in Red State No. 0001. He is a For-Real Nobel prize scientist, and I'm not at all hate-in on him, but there sure were a lot of vague words in his communique. We have just learned to be suspect of vague words cobbled together for delivery to the proletariat, even by a truly outstanding scientist such as Dr. Chu. Maybe Inky CAN put it within the visible wavelength spectrum. It does not fall within that 300 - 750 nm wavelength range that the standard humanoid eye favors.
There seems to be a very subtle economic revolution being promulgated by the new regime, > 750 nm lambda. The stated goal is for sheeple tranquilization and lubrication. An early Carole King song comes to mind, most appropriate, post-reformation.
Viernes, Tejas, calor, delightful torture done TO me by..., while I still can. Flo, u have to know where I would be going with this. Have a nice day, while U still can.
Posted by: Django - N Exile somewhere in/around the 30th Parallel | March 6, 2009 10:26 AM
It's funny, I've been told my post's can get long winded. So, I write a short post from what I read. Used Mr. Chu's words, and what it said to me is their hoping for energy independence. Not, we have energy independence, but hoping for breakthroughs.
ME) And we should continue to use our own resources while trying to development energy independence.
I should apologize (i guess) for not explaining "my" thoughts, more thoroughly. At least it shows I think for myself. Right or wrong. lol
Posted by: PG | March 6, 2009 12:10 PM
Oh Django, I feel the earth move when you post; you make me feel like a natural woman; you're so nuclear.
Posted by: Flo | March 6, 2009 3:18 PM
Hola Flo,
I'm slowly getting the revs up, going through those critical rpms at this moment, totally P.L. dependent, but cautiously optimistic. Natural Woman, a great Carole King song, but stamped for eternal acclaim by Aretha. The CK song that I fear at this point in the continuum, would be "It's Too Late". With total disregard for that ~ Viernes, Guitarras, Torture encouraged and favored by unusually Natural Ls. Well, Maybe there can be just a little causa for hope... here.
Posted by: Django - N Exile somewhere in/around the 30th Parallel | March 6, 2009 4:40 PM