Energy From Thorium Discussion Forum

It is currently Sep 24, 2018 10:02 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 108 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 8  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Jan 01, 2017 12:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Posts: 3785
Location: Alabama
The selling of Rick Perry’s smarts

I'm not terribly worried about how smart Perry is. I'm much more interested in his strategy.

When I was at NASA, we always lamented that there wasn't a "real rocket scientist" running the agency. In 2005, we got one. He was a disaster. It made me realize that political jobs like this are best executed by those with political experience.

Chu and Moniz were both well-credentialed academics, but I think when they got to DC they got beat up on the playground the first day and had their lunch money stolen. All their genteel academic smarts didn't do them much good in the intensely political environment of DC. I predict Perry will fare much better as Secretary of Energy than they did, in the sense that I believe he will be able to implement his strategy successfully, and I think he's already told us what that strategy is.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 01, 2017 2:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Nov 14, 2013 7:47 pm
Posts: 574
Location: Iowa, USA
Would it not take an act of Congress to get rid of the Department of Energy? I'm pretty sure it would since it took an act of Congress to create it. I can see that Trump, Perry, Pence, et al. in the new administration want to see the Department of Energy have what might be called a lighter touch on the energy industry. I find it curious that the news and pundit media is focusing on what Trump and his team might do to Energy but little to nothing on what Congress and/or the Republican Party as a whole plan to do. Obama could do only so much with his "phone and a pen" on policy and Congress did little to oppose him on his executive actions, Trump will be similarly limited and Congress might not be as friendly to him.

Mr. Sorensen, I am not being critical of your posts here as you can only link to the news that is printed. We had a Congressional election too but the news people don't seem to cover it much. I'd like to see how this new Congress plans to address the nation's energy supply in the future. I expect that will not come until we start to see Congress debate new bills. I don't expect agencies like the Energy, Commerce, and Education to go away as Perry had wanted but I do expect them to be put on a short leash. If these departments do go away then I will be mildly surprised and quite pleased.

_________________
Disclaimer: I am an engineer but not a nuclear engineer, mechanical engineer, chemical engineer, or industrial engineer. My education included electrical, computer, and software engineering.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 03, 2017 7:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Posts: 3785
Location: Alabama
How will Rick Perry run the Department of Energy?

Quote:
Perry called the decision a “tremendous honor,” but has said little of his plans for the agency. Even so, his coming nomination has divided energy observers, with some arguing he is not as qualified as the scientists who led the DOE under President Obama.


I think Rick Perry has already told us what he will do. I just don't think most people believe him. That might be a bad bet.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 05, 2017 8:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Posts: 3785
Location: Alabama
Will Rick Perry Be the Best (or Worst) Energy Secretary Ever?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 05, 2017 2:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Nov 14, 2016 5:10 pm
Posts: 1
Location: North Texas
Being from Texas and having watched his exploits as governor, I'd say that was a reasonably fair assessment of Perry. But how ironic. The guy who flubbed his way out of a presidential race has been handed a political plum, one with potentially huge economic and political gains. Being an oil and gas man I doubt he's even aware of LFTR, much less what it could do for his political future if he handled it properly and to our collective benefit. My naive side can't help wondering if an Einstein-to-FDR type letter from someone with a recognizable name in the industry would help the situation. :lol:

_________________
SJE


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 05, 2017 3:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Oct 06, 2010 9:12 pm
Posts: 138
Location: Cleveland, OH
Given how silent Perry has been, I suspect he already has his marching orders from Trump and they are biding their time. My further suspicion is that Trump will re-organize the pieces that make up DOE (and probably other departments/agencies/organizations); for example moving the NNSA elsewhere or on its own, and the national labs too. I think his people had also mentioned moving the DOE's climate folks to NOAA. Overall it would be like a spin-off or maybe divestiture is a better term.

Perhaps the new president believes the DOE should concern itself with, well, energy... He does have several appointees that are from the oil and gas sector of energy, but I see Trump as a "construction" guy that will go beyond 'construction for oil and gas'. I can see him being in favor of more nuclear power plants just for all the construction he imagines it will create (since he probably only considers Gen III+ LWRs). Of course all this would cause interesting fights against both democrats and republicans...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 05, 2017 4:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Nov 14, 2013 7:47 pm
Posts: 574
Location: Iowa, USA
Kirk Sorensen wrote:
http://www.houstonpress.com/news/will-rick-perry-be-the-best-or-worst-energy-secretary-ever-9078937

Quote:
Will Rick Perry Be the Best (or Worst) Energy Secretary Ever?

I'm hoping he will be the last Energy Secretary ever.

_________________
Disclaimer: I am an engineer but not a nuclear engineer, mechanical engineer, chemical engineer, or industrial engineer. My education included electrical, computer, and software engineering.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 07, 2017 4:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Posts: 3785
Location: Alabama
Liberals should understand the Department of Energy before defending it


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 08, 2017 7:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Dec 22, 2015 8:40 pm
Posts: 359
Location: Florida
If DOE is abolished, I guess Perry's job is done? Also:
Now in a meeting that took place on the 29 of July [2016], Putin ordered the leading Russian nuclear institutions Kurchatov and Rosatom to:
‘the National Research Centre "Kurchatov Institute" and State Corporation "Rosatom" Atomic Energy will in conjunction make proposals on the prospects of using thorium.’ (Deadline March 1st 2017)
Putin likes Trump.

_________________
"Those who say it can’t be done are usually interrupted by others doing it."

—James Arthur Baldwin, American novelist, essayist, playwright, poet, and social critic


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 13, 2017 8:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Posts: 3785
Location: Alabama
Chairman Murkowski and Ranking Member Cantwell Announce Upcoming Nomination Hearing

Quote:
The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources will hold a hearing on Thursday, January 19, 2017 at 10:00 a.m. EST in Room 366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington, D.C. The purpose of the hearing is to consider the nomination of the Honorable Rick Perry to be the Secretary of Energy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 13, 2017 10:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Dec 22, 2015 8:40 pm
Posts: 359
Location: Florida
Thank you, Kirk, for this topic and your views, and to Kurt, Jim, Steve, and all the contributors. I'm glad to know the hearing schedule. Should be interesting.
Kirk Sorensen wrote:
I'm not terribly worried about how smart Perry is. I'm much more interested in his strategy.

When I was at NASA, we always lamented that there wasn't a "real rocket scientist" running the agency. In 2005, we got one. He was a disaster. It made me realize that political jobs like this are best executed by those with political experience.

Chu and Moniz were both well-credentialed academics, but I think when they got to DC they got beat up on the playground the first day and had their lunch money stolen. All their genteel academic smarts didn't do them much good in the intensely political environment of DC. I predict Perry will fare much better as Secretary of Energy than they did, in the sense that I believe he will be able to implement his strategy successfully, and I think he's already told us what that strategy is.
This is valuable perspective for those of us on the outside looking in wondering when an MSR designed for the thorium fuel cycle that is the FE LFTR will become a national energy asset.

I don't understand. Kirk, you pointed out in your UT thesis how the discoverers of U-233 from thorium commented on the enormous cash value of thorium that Dr. Alvin later found would work best in an MSR. Our new president's last name can be an interesting verb. Nuclear trumps carbon oxidation. Anyway. I have a gift for the obvious.

_________________
"Those who say it can’t be done are usually interrupted by others doing it."

—James Arthur Baldwin, American novelist, essayist, playwright, poet, and social critic


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 17, 2017 9:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Dec 29, 2011 10:14 am
Posts: 217
For what its worth, remember, the word thorium is actually in the republican platform. Of course molten salt reactors were also in Romney's Promise to America...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 18, 2017 11:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Posts: 3785
Location: Alabama
Rick Perry will be a superb Energy Secretary

Quote:
In my former positions as Texas secretary of state, Texas railroad commissioner — overseeing the state’s energy sector — and as the U.S. ambassador to Mexico under President George W. Bush, I have worked closely with Gov. Perry on developing Texas’ energy sector and a variety of other issues. I could not be more confident in his exceptional leadership and his qualifications for the position of U.S. secretary of energy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 19, 2017 10:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Posts: 3785
Location: Alabama
Trump team prepares dramatic cuts

Quote:
At the Department of Energy, it would roll back funding for nuclear physics and advanced scientific computing research to 2008 levels, eliminate the Office of Electricity, eliminate the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy and scrap the Office of Fossil Energy, which focuses on technologies to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.


The 2017 DOE Budget request has $2.898B for "Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy", $600M for "Fossil Energy Research and Development", $636M for "Nuclear Physics research", and $663M for "Advanced Scientific Computing Research."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jan 19, 2017 11:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Posts: 3785
Location: Alabama
Rick Perry Confirmation Hearing Opening Statement

Quote:
My past statements made over five years ago about abolishing the Department of Energy do not reflect my current thinking. In fact, after being briefed on so many of the vital functions of the Department of Energy, I regret recommending its elimination.


I watched a big chunk of his confirmation hearings and I think his probability of confirmation is very high. He handled himself well as every senator essentially asked him to keep the DOE gravy flowing to their state.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 108 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 8  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group