14 thoughts on “A Review of Presidential Energy Policy

  1. Hi, Kirk

    I would like to translate your googletechtalks videos in Italian (in spite of Carlo Rubbia, nobody knows about Thorium there, including me until recently), Spanish (and perhaps French), and publish them in youtube (if ok with you, by the way; of course, all attributions, etc).

    The reason is that it is impossible for foreigners (even with a decent knowledge of English) to follow your speeches (too fast, too "explosive" and funny, which is of course a delight for an anglo-saxon audience).

    Now, only one of the videos ("Is Nuclear Waste Really Waste?") has the interactive transcript showing the text, so that helps. Before trying speech recognition tools (or, God forbid, transcribing from audio), I wanted to know if the text of some of those speeches by chance exists already. Probably not, but just to make sure.

    Thank you


  2. It seems more of the same. Obama is apparently going to recast the status quo rather than break it, just as the last 8 President's have. Energy forms that would challenge existing energy industries have no political money or influence, but can threaten those that do. Energy markets are very price elastic with respect to supply/demand, and even market perceptions, so, any new forms of energy are a threat to existing energy industries.

    The IFR block of 1994 is great evidence.

    I'm convinced that the world needs to wait for the Chinese, South Koreans, Indians and Japanese for the new forms of energy that humanity so vitally needs.

  3. How unfortunate that Richard Nixon, who set the benchmark for what a president ought not to be, looks so good in comparison to those who came after. I used to loathe Nixon and speak out against nuclear energy. I sure have changed.

Leave a Reply