So you want to get rid of the Department of Energy?

[Toro]

There is a whole bunch of stuff in here I didn't know.

Few people understand the Department of Energy, including some presidential candidates who want to get rid of it. But before it is completely abolished, the candidates might want to take a closer look and understand what's under the DOE's hood.

They may be surprised to find that the nation's nuclear weapons and naval reactors are owned by the DOE, not the Department of Defense. So abolishing the DOE means candidates want to terminate the National Nuclear Safety Administration, the office that manages the nation's nuclear weapons and naval reactors. It seems odd that some candidates want to dismantle the nation's nuclear defense systems while promising to keep America strong.

One candidate suggests that he would abolish most DOE programs and transfer critical ones to other agencies. Let's start with NNSA. Which federal agency should own the nation's nuclear weapons programs? Don't suggest DOD -- since the 1940s it's been the will of the nation to keep nuclear weapons in civilian hands.

NNSA is a big program. President Obama's proposed budget for DOE's fiscal year 2012 is $29.6 billion. Within that budget, NNSA and related defense activities represent $18.1 billion, or approximately 60% of the DOE's budget.

DOE's other big-ticket item is energy programs. These programs amount to approximately $12.1 billion, or 40% of the budget. Energy programs are civilian offices that manage government responsibilities to decontaminate and decommission nuclear facilities and dispose of nuclear waste from hospitals, universities and non-defense facilities (taxpayers do not pay to dispose of nuclear waste from commercial power plants). Energy programs also include funding the Energy Information Administration, the strategic petroleum reserve, the naval petroleum reserve, home heating oil reserves, electricity delivery and energy reliability, energy efficiency and renewable energy (EERE), and science.

Science alone represents $5.4 billion, 45% of the energy program's budget and 18% of the DOE's overall budget. In DOE-speak, science means national defense laboratories, including the Sandia, Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos, Argonne, Jefferson, Fermi, Oak Ridge, Savannah River, and Brookhaven facilities.

Altogether, 80% to 85% of the DOE's functions would be considered critical by most voters -- and some would say all of it is essential. Candidates should explain to voters why they believe a majority of DOE functions are non-essential and what they would do with the nation's nuclear bombs, naval reactors, research facilities, petroleum reserves, EIA and so on.

We know some candidates will not transfer DOE's functions to the Departments of Commerce, Transportation, Interior or Education because candidates want to eliminate some of those agencies as well. The question remains: Where would they transfer 85% to 90% of DOE?

They don't know. They have no idea what DOE does. They incorrectly assume DOE is filled with flower children focused on crazy projects and ignoring traditional energy sources. They are wrong. DOE is technologically agnostic. For the several decades, DOE has managed each energy source independently; each fuel has its own office. This includes the offices of fossil fuels, nuclear, electricity and EERE.

Don't Unplug the Energy Department

 

[Chris]

Republicans are idiots.

The Department of Energy is sponsoring research that is using a gallium alloy to seperate hydrogen from water using only sunlight.....

Scientists say producing hydrogen in the backyard could be possible in future by "tweaking" an inexpensive semiconductor material, which could be available in commercial store, for generating hydrogen from water by using sunlight.

"When the catalyst is properly manufactured, one could buy it in a commercial store for making hydrogen in his backyard," Professor Madhu Menon of the University of Kentucky told IBTimes.

"The research should attract the interest of other scientists across a variety of disciplines. Photocatalysis is currently one of the hottest topics in science. We expect the present work to have a wide appeal in the community spanning chemistry, physics and engineering," Menon added.

A research finding shows that an alloy formed by a two percent substitution of antimony (Sb) in gallium nitride (GaN) has the right electrical properties to enable solar energy to split water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen.

Producing Hydrogen in 'Backyard' Could be Possible: Scientist - International Business Times

 

[occupied]

Things like this makes their heads hurt, then they beat up on Obama for a while and forget about it entirely.

 

[Contumacious]

Few people understand the Department of Energy,

I'm here to help you understand the Department of Energy.

Let's begin here:

Your Insane U.S. Energy Department

In mid-September, Cathy Zoi, an Assistant Secretary of Energy, said that the U.S. Department of Energy has a “mandate” to issue regulations about what household appliances should be available to Americans in the future.

.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Let’s get rid of the DOE after the economy’s recovered and unemployment is back to 4.4 percent; that way the displaced workers will have a job opportunity.

 

[Trajan]

There is a whole bunch of stuff in here I didn't know.

Few people understand the Department of Energy, including some presidential candidates who want to get rid of it. But before it is completely abolished, the candidates might want to take a closer look and understand what's under the DOE's hood.

They may be surprised to find that the nation's nuclear weapons and naval reactors are owned by the DOE, not the Department of Defense. So abolishing the DOE means candidates want to terminate the National Nuclear Safety Administration, the office that manages the nation's nuclear weapons and naval reactors. It seems odd that some candidates want to dismantle the nation's nuclear defense systems while promising to keep America strong.

One candidate suggests that he would abolish most DOE programs and transfer critical ones to other agencies. Let's start with NNSA. Which federal agency should own the nation's nuclear weapons programs? Don't suggest DOD -- since the 1940s it's been the will of the nation to keep nuclear weapons in civilian hands.

NNSA is a big program. President Obama's proposed budget for DOE's fiscal year 2012 is $29.6 billion. Within that budget, NNSA and related defense activities represent $18.1 billion, or approximately 60% of the DOE's budget.

DOE's other big-ticket item is energy programs. These programs amount to approximately $12.1 billion, or 40% of the budget. Energy programs are civilian offices that manage government responsibilities to decontaminate and decommission nuclear facilities and dispose of nuclear waste from hospitals, universities and non-defense facilities (taxpayers do not pay to dispose of nuclear waste from commercial power plants). Energy programs also include funding the Energy Information Administration, the strategic petroleum reserve, the naval petroleum reserve, home heating oil reserves, electricity delivery and energy reliability, energy efficiency and renewable energy (EERE), and science.

Science alone represents $5.4 billion, 45% of the energy program's budget and 18% of the DOE's overall budget. In DOE-speak, science means national defense laboratories, including the Sandia, Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos, Argonne, Jefferson, Fermi, Oak Ridge, Savannah River, and Brookhaven facilities.

Altogether, 80% to 85% of the DOE's functions would be considered critical by most voters -- and some would say all of it is essential. Candidates should explain to voters why they believe a majority of DOE functions are non-essential and what they would do with the nation's nuclear bombs, naval reactors, research facilities, petroleum reserves, EIA and so on.

We know some candidates will not transfer DOE's functions to the Departments of Commerce, Transportation, Interior or Education because candidates want to eliminate some of those agencies as well. The question remains: Where would they transfer 85% to 90% of DOE?

They don't know. They have no idea what DOE does. They incorrectly assume DOE is filled with flower children focused on crazy projects and ignoring traditional energy sources. They are wrong. DOE is technologically agnostic. For the several decades, DOE has managed each energy source independently; each fuel has its own office. This includes the offices of fossil fuels, nuclear, electricity and EERE.

Don't Unplug the Energy Department

Science alone represents $5.4 billion, 45% of the energy program's budget and 18% of the DOE's overall budget. In DOE-speak, science means national defense laboratories, including the Sandia, Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos, Argonne, Jefferson, Fermi, Oak Ridge, Savannah River, and Brookhaven facilities.

uhm Berkeley?

the interior dept could take over a lot of that. *shrugs*

 

[Chris]

Part of what DOE does is track down nuclear material worldwide to keep it out of the hands of terrorists.

But the main reason the Republicans want to get rid of DOE is that DOE is sponsoring research that may replace oil and coal.

Rut roh!

 

[Mad Scientist]

America is drowning in debt but the only answer is to raise taxes? Gov't can't get cut at all huh?

You know, the geniuses in DC are all for keeping taxation at the same level and decreasing benefits for us, but any talk of cutting or eliminating ANY gov't agency is always met with the same kind of panicked "we can't do without this" stories planted in newspapers and broadcast TV.

Don't fall for it. Gov't CAN and SHOULD do with less. Everyone else is!

 

[Mad Scientist]

Part of what DOE does is track down nuclear material worldwide to keep it out of the hands of terrorists.

Right. The CIA, DIA, FBI and the Defense Department can't do that.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Part of what DOE does is track down nuclear material worldwide to keep it out of the hands of terrorists.

But the main reason the Republicans want to get rid of DOE is that DOE is sponsoring research that may replace oil and coal.

Rut roh!

Truth is that most intelligent adults are all in favor of alternate energies. And that includes every Republican I know. What they are against is the government directing which company and source of energy should be worked on. I prefer that science and not politics finds the next best solution. Is that too difficult to understand?

 

[Mr. H.]

Over the years, the DOE has funded research into oil and natural gas applications that have resulted in the development of previously by-passed reserves, resulting in greater recovery rates and new discoveries.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Over the years, the DOE has funded research into oil and natural gas applications that have resulted in the development of previously by-passed reserves, resulting in greater recovery rates and new discoveries.

Did they really? Or did we the people fund this? And could or should some private business have funded this?

 

[WatertheTree]

There is a whole bunch of stuff in here I didn't know.

Few people understand the Department of Energy, including some presidential candidates who want to get rid of it. But before it is completely abolished, the candidates might want to take a closer look and understand what's under the DOE's hood.

They may be surprised to find that the nation's nuclear weapons and naval reactors are owned by the DOE, not the Department of Defense. So abolishing the DOE means candidates want to terminate the National Nuclear Safety Administration, the office that manages the nation's nuclear weapons and naval reactors. It seems odd that some candidates want to dismantle the nation's nuclear defense systems while promising to keep America strong.

One candidate suggests that he would abolish most DOE programs and transfer critical ones to other agencies. Let's start with NNSA. Which federal agency should own the nation's nuclear weapons programs? Don't suggest DOD -- since the 1940s it's been the will of the nation to keep nuclear weapons in civilian hands.

NNSA is a big program. President Obama's proposed budget for DOE's fiscal year 2012 is $29.6 billion. Within that budget, NNSA and related defense activities represent $18.1 billion, or approximately 60% of the DOE's budget.

DOE's other big-ticket item is energy programs. These programs amount to approximately $12.1 billion, or 40% of the budget. Energy programs are civilian offices that manage government responsibilities to decontaminate and decommission nuclear facilities and dispose of nuclear waste from hospitals, universities and non-defense facilities (taxpayers do not pay to dispose of nuclear waste from commercial power plants). Energy programs also include funding the Energy Information Administration, the strategic petroleum reserve, the naval petroleum reserve, home heating oil reserves, electricity delivery and energy reliability, energy efficiency and renewable energy (EERE), and science.

Science alone represents $5.4 billion, 45% of the energy program's budget and 18% of the DOE's overall budget. In DOE-speak, science means national defense laboratories, including the Sandia, Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos, Argonne, Jefferson, Fermi, Oak Ridge, Savannah River, and Brookhaven facilities.

Altogether, 80% to 85% of the DOE's functions would be considered critical by most voters -- and some would say all of it is essential. Candidates should explain to voters why they believe a majority of DOE functions are non-essential and what they would do with the nation's nuclear bombs, naval reactors, research facilities, petroleum reserves, EIA and so on.

We know some candidates will not transfer DOE's functions to the Departments of Commerce, Transportation, Interior or Education because candidates want to eliminate some of those agencies as well. The question remains: Where would they transfer 85% to 90% of DOE?

They don't know. They have no idea what DOE does. They incorrectly assume DOE is filled with flower children focused on crazy projects and ignoring traditional energy sources. They are wrong. DOE is technologically agnostic. For the several decades, DOE has managed each energy source independently; each fuel has its own office. This includes the offices of fossil fuels, nuclear, electricity and EERE.

Don't Unplug the Energy Department

First of all everything shrunk down I agree with, I just dont take your opinion on it. The mysterious candidate who suggested moving nukes to DOD was Ron Paul. I agree with him, you claim that its the will of the people that the nukes stay in civilian hands. I say your a liar who embellishes the truth. I dont think most citizens give flying fuck who controls the nukes, I think they are more concerned with runaway debt threatening the national defense.

All of your science is plundering of the treasury by private corporations. Its money they use for R and D, and then when a new technology is developed it is given to private industry and sold to the masses for a profit. Its the military industrial complex.

Agian you claim its the will of the people, but that is a fucking lie. I dont know to many people that would rather have a new predator drone then say disability for disabled Americans.

You dont know either. Thats why the only thing you can name specifically is nukes and everything else is more ambiguous as we go. From nukes to R & D, to 'critical programs'

It is all government pork to corporate power shithead. Were sick and tired of paying for this crap

 

[Mr. H.]

Over the years, the DOE has funded research into oil and natural gas applications that have resulted in the development of previously by-passed reserves, resulting in greater recovery rates and new discoveries.

Did they really? Or did we the people fund this? And could or should some private business have funded this?

Good point. The DOE's contributions do pale in comparison to private industry's investment.

 

[Toro]

There is a whole bunch of stuff in here I didn't know.

Few people understand the Department of Energy, including some presidential candidates who want to get rid of it. But before it is completely abolished, the candidates might want to take a closer look and understand what's under the DOE's hood.

They may be surprised to find that the nation's nuclear weapons and naval reactors are owned by the DOE, not the Department of Defense. So abolishing the DOE means candidates want to terminate the National Nuclear Safety Administration, the office that manages the nation's nuclear weapons and naval reactors. It seems odd that some candidates want to dismantle the nation's nuclear defense systems while promising to keep America strong.

One candidate suggests that he would abolish most DOE programs and transfer critical ones to other agencies. Let's start with NNSA. Which federal agency should own the nation's nuclear weapons programs? Don't suggest DOD -- since the 1940s it's been the will of the nation to keep nuclear weapons in civilian hands.

NNSA is a big program. President Obama's proposed budget for DOE's fiscal year 2012 is $29.6 billion. Within that budget, NNSA and related defense activities represent $18.1 billion, or approximately 60% of the DOE's budget.

DOE's other big-ticket item is energy programs. These programs amount to approximately $12.1 billion, or 40% of the budget. Energy programs are civilian offices that manage government responsibilities to decontaminate and decommission nuclear facilities and dispose of nuclear waste from hospitals, universities and non-defense facilities (taxpayers do not pay to dispose of nuclear waste from commercial power plants). Energy programs also include funding the Energy Information Administration, the strategic petroleum reserve, the naval petroleum reserve, home heating oil reserves, electricity delivery and energy reliability, energy efficiency and renewable energy (EERE), and science.

Science alone represents $5.4 billion, 45% of the energy program's budget and 18% of the DOE's overall budget. In DOE-speak, science means national defense laboratories, including the Sandia, Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos, Argonne, Jefferson, Fermi, Oak Ridge, Savannah River, and Brookhaven facilities.

Altogether, 80% to 85% of the DOE's functions would be considered critical by most voters -- and some would say all of it is essential. Candidates should explain to voters why they believe a majority of DOE functions are non-essential and what they would do with the nation's nuclear bombs, naval reactors, research facilities, petroleum reserves, EIA and so on.

We know some candidates will not transfer DOE's functions to the Departments of Commerce, Transportation, Interior or Education because candidates want to eliminate some of those agencies as well. The question remains: Where would they transfer 85% to 90% of DOE?

They don't know. They have no idea what DOE does. They incorrectly assume DOE is filled with flower children focused on crazy projects and ignoring traditional energy sources. They are wrong. DOE is technologically agnostic. For the several decades, DOE has managed each energy source independently; each fuel has its own office. This includes the offices of fossil fuels, nuclear, electricity and EERE.

Don't Unplug the Energy Department

First of all everything shrunk down I agree with, I just dont take your opinion on it. The mysterious candidate who suggested moving nukes to DOD was Ron Paul. I agree with him, you claim that its the will of the people that the nukes stay in civilian hands. I say your a liar who embellishes the truth. I dont think most citizens give flying fuck who controls the nukes, I think they are more concerned with runaway debt threatening the national defense.

All of your science is plundering of the treasury by private corporations. Its money they use for R and D, and then when a new technology is developed it is given to private industry and sold to the masses for a profit. Its the military industrial complex.

Agian you claim its the will of the people, but that is a fucking lie. I dont know to many people that would rather have a new predator drone then say disability for disabled Americans.

You dont know either. Thats why the only thing you can name specifically is nukes and everything else is more ambiguous as we go. From nukes to R & D, to 'critical programs'

It is all government pork to corporate power shithead. Were sick and tired of paying for this crap

Dood, take a Valium. I never claimed anything nor did I offer an opinion. I just posted the article.

 

[The Rabbi]

Typical lib arguments: Cut out Energy Department and we'll have no energy. Cut out Education Dept and we'll have no education.
Hey, genius, what did we do before those departments existed? The Energy Dept didnt exist before Jimmy Carter signed it into law. What did we do all those years prior to Carter?
Take any necessary function and transfer it to an appropriate department, like Interior. And gut the rest.

 

[WatertheTree]

Over the years, the DOE has funded research into oil and natural gas applications that have resulted in the development of previously by-passed reserves, resulting in greater recovery rates and new discoveries.

Did they really? Or did we the people fund this? And could or should some private business have funded this?

Its crony capitalism. They used taxpayer money to find the shit and develop technology to extract it, then gave it to private power to sell to the masses for a profit.

While this sort of thing is actually needed for a nation to be competitive I think most people can agree that the monetary resources could either be left with the people that earned it, or used for something other then OIL/WAR/BANKS.

Capitalism for the poor, socialism for the rich.

 

[WatertheTree]

Typical lib arguments: Cut out Energy Department and we'll have no energy. Cut out Education Dept and we'll have no education.
Hey, genius, what did we do before those departments existed? The Energy Dept didnt exist before Jimmy Carter signed it into law. What did we do all those years prior to Carter?
Take any necessary function and transfer it to an appropriate department, like Interior. And gut the rest.

Shut the fuck up. You openly support a candidate who thinks the role of the federal government is to subsidize energy even more.

 

[The Rabbi]

Typical lib arguments: Cut out Energy Department and we'll have no energy. Cut out Education Dept and we'll have no education.
Hey, genius, what did we do before those departments existed? The Energy Dept didnt exist before Jimmy Carter signed it into law. What did we do all those years prior to Carter?
Take any necessary function and transfer it to an appropriate department, like Interior. And gut the rest.

Shut the fuck up. You openly support a candidate who thinks the role of the federal government is to subsidize energy even more.

Even when you're right, you're wrong. Class envy is soooo out.

 

[zzzz]

Many people do not know that is the DOE that transport nuclear weapons in the US. Nuclear weapon on a truck on a US highway is under DOE control.