Scott Sklar, The Stella Group
March 07, 2013
|
24 Comments
Here we have a President who has been emphatic on green energy and has put money where his mouth is: $90 billion in the Stimulus Bill (ARRA), highest car mileage standards ever (CAFÉ, 50+ mpg), and the first Clean Air Act regulations for mercury from coal electric power generation plants.
The President had good intentions in nominating Nobel Prize winner Chu to head the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and I admire Chu’s commitment and intellect, but frankly, the experience wasn’t a good one. His relations with Democrats were not good, and his relationship with Republicans was non-existent.
The Secretary was aloof and not very political, although he somewhat compensated for those qualities by being open and interactive with the scientific community and industry. But frankly, the national laboratories were “iced out” of communications for quite awhile, and the Secretary not only didn’t have an open dialogue with industry, he “staged” interactions and meetings — there was no ongoing free flow of information to impact thought, policies or actions.
So in term two, I thought the President would learn from this past experience — but sadly, no. MIT’s Dr. Ernest Moniz is his nominee. He is a former Clinton Administration retread with a solid intellect, but he also has much of the same weaknesses as his predecessor — just without the Nobel Prize.
Moniz is not an administrator that can run a $26 billion federal agency.
Moniz is not known for an easy manner and solid political skills, but, similar to Chu, he is academically superior and aloof.
Moniz is not known as an “interactor with industry.”
But the fatal flaw may be none of the above. The media has labeled Moniz as “a strong supporter of second generation nuclear power and natural gas.” And that’s what troubles me the most, even as I blend natural gas with many of my renewable and efficiency projects.
This focus and expertise is back towards the twentieth century world view — analogous to focusing on main frame computers and wired copper telephone lines. We are in the twenty first century with distributed, self healing communications and information systems. We have a severely aging electric grid that is open to outages from minor storms, poor electric power quality (surges sags and transients), and breaches in cyber security, which already costs us hundreds of billions of dollars in lost economic activity. Nuclear power plants (which have a host of other vulnerabilities, costs and risks) are not the answer.
The Moniz nomination might be an easy Senate confirmation, but it does not position the United States into a more agile, resilient, distributed energy system or one that maximizes energy efficiency, storage, and electric load management — which we know is always less expensive than electric generation from any source and technology.
The Secretary of Energy for the twenty first century needs to be someone with solid academic skills, but also with proven business experience and innate political skills. The Secretary must interact with every political faction in Congress, and also focus on the media, laboratories, universities and, most importantly, the private sector. Staged public meetings should be avoided.
Governing is not easy, but choices of leaders and their portfolio of attributes send messages. Having PhD’s are great, but a portfolio of experiences and the “human” quality needs to have equal billing. The issues are too important, and incremental improvements or “more of the same” is not an option.
Lead image: U.S. Capitol via Shutterstock
To add your comments you must sign-in or create a free account.
March 12, 2013
My very 1st comment on this story was to suggest that the development of Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors instead of the continuous use of Light Water Reactor technology would solve considerable problems including many of those you listed. Thorium is an abundant metal. It has ninety times the energy density of the uranium used to fuel LWRs. One of the byproducts of the LFTR would be Rare Earth Materials ending Chinas' monopoly on the stuff. R&D and production of batteries and electronics would cost much less. The 600 to 800*C waste heat from the LFTR could be used to convert coal into clean gas. Finally clean coal and we have lots of coal. The price of oil would drop considerably. No more oil wars. R&D on EVs for all kinds of equipment would ramp up drastically. You could run a Euclid with the torque provided by electric motors and with LFTRs generating all the electricity necessary and plenty of Rare Earth to develop batteries many problems could and would be solved.
Dr. Alvin Weinberg who invented the LWR and the LFTR technologies while the head of Oakridge National Labs recommended to the DOE that LFTRs be pursued for domestic energy production because it's safer, Thorium is more energy dense, and there is lots more of it. LFTRs have zero possibility of a runaway reaction, need no water for cooling and much more. LFTRs have one thing going against them, the waste products that the reactor produces cannot be used to make weapons. On the other hand the 1/2 life of the waste is <300 years.
Please everybody do some research and make some noise!!
ThoriumEnergyAlliance.com
God bless,
Mike