This is Steve. He's trying to show you what science thinks (right hand) and what Congress does (left hand)
You know those awesome innovation hubs Energy Secretary Steve Chu was pulling together? The ones focused on tackling the most difficult problems in renewable energy? The ones which break away from the traditional, archaic, loosely focused approach we currently use to create interdisciplinary institutes that focus laser sharp on specific advances in technology, once again restoring the US to vanguard of cutting edge, highly applicable solutions? Oh yeah, those hubs have been all but cut by the House Appropriations Subcommittee.
Funding for the Energy Innovation Hubs has been cut to less than $35 million from Chu’s initial request of $280 million. Furthermore, believing that they understand the science better than the Lawrence Berkeley National Labs director-emeritus and Nobel laureate Steve Chu, they have gone against Chu’s reccomendations and funded $190 million in hydrogen research.
Wait, what?
Lets get the talk straight from the horses’ mouth. Here’s what Chu has to say about these hubs.
“I believe that to solve the energy problem, the Department of Energy must strive to be the modern version of Bell Labs in energy research, and that is what these Hubs will do. They will essentially be little ‘Bell Lablets’. The scientific collaboration the Hubs will foster will be unique and indispensable, and must be backed by a meaningful and sustained investment. ”
So there you have it guys: The Energy Secretary picked to push through a massive overhaul and reform of American energy research has been overruled on his massive overhauls and reform of American energy research by a bunch of massively entrenched political… idiots.
I know it’s not a nice word but for Pete’s sake there’s no other word to describe it. When politicians cut something as absolutely revolutionary and game-changing as these institutions in the name of “redundancy” then drop $190 on a failing, low-potential option like hydrogen research it can not be described as anything but lunatic idiocy. Further more: Out of a budget that’s $26.9 billion (with a b) dollars, you guys take issue with something that’s one percent of the budget? Wait, you take it out, then you replace it with something equally as large but has nowhere near as broad an applicability and holds limited scientific creditability?
I’ve been watching a lot of Top Gear recently, so forgive me when I say this:
Oh… cock.
Via Wired.
No related posts.
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.