Skip to main content

Obama's Cabinet Picks: Energy Secretary

Obama's Cabinet Energy SecretaryAdd a new name to the list: the AP offers up former Indiana Congressman Philip Sharp. Sharp is currently serving as president of the nonpartisan, nonprofit Resources for the Future.

And in a feature titled "The New Team," The New York Times fills in the backstory of an Energy Secretary candidate first reported by the Washington Post's Steve Mufson last week: (Ret.) General James L. Jones.

Click here for more NNN coverage on who will be in the Obama Cabinet.

Comments

Charles Barton said…
It would be highly desirable for the Energy Department to be headed by someone who had some education in engineering, economics and physics. It would nice to have an energy secretary who could spot a violation of the second law of thermodynamics in a report, or note that a discussion of energy efficiency had overlooked the impact of demand rebound after improved energy efficiency.
Anonymous said…
Charles, that would be too sensible and logical for DC. Ever get called for jury duty? I have. Never served on a single jury, got rejected every time. As soon as I told them what I did for a living, I got challenged. I finally had a bailiff clue me in: lawyers don't want smart people on a jury.

There's probably a similar rule in DC. Unless Obomba does something really surprising, we're going to get a political hack at DOE, probably a lawyer by training.
Anonymous said…
Philip Sharp looks like he knows something about nuclear energy. He headed up the 2005 MIT study.
Kirk Sorensen said…
The MIT study had blinders on about how to implement reactor designs that actually do something about the problems facing the nuclear industry. Not a good recommendation in my opinion.

Popular posts from this blog

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

A Billion Miles Under Nuclear Energy (Updated)

And the winner is…Cassini-Huygens, in triple overtime.

The spaceship conceived in 1982 and launched fifteen years later, will crash into Saturn on September 15, after a mission of 19 years and 355 days, powered by the audacity and technical prowess of scientists and engineers from 17 different countries, and 72 pounds of plutonium.

The mission was so successful that it was extended three times; it was intended to last only until 2008.

Since April, the ship has been continuing to orbit Saturn, swinging through the 1,500-mile gap between the planet and its rings, an area not previously explored. This is a good maneuver for a spaceship nearing the end of its mission, since colliding with a rock could end things early.

Cassini will dive a little deeper and plunge toward Saturn’s surface, where it will transmit data until it burns up in the planet’s atmosphere. The radio signal will arrive here early Friday morning, Eastern time. A NASA video explains.

In the years since Cassini has launc…