Renewable energy companies ARE getting funds – that’s how they are doing all the stuff in the linked stories – from universities getting research to Tesla getting factory building money.

Renewable energy companies ARE getting funds – that’s how they are doing all the stuff in the linked stories – from universities getting research to Tesla getting factory building money.

There is not enough fertile cropable land area on the earth to produce enough grass to be changed to oil to match the consumption of the United States.

Most of the uranium 235 present at the creation of the earth then gathered from exploding neutron stars has decayed into lead; The human race might as well use it in nuclear reactors rather than letting it go to waste. Uranium 238 and thorium change into lead far more slowly but they also will be wasted if not used.

The conversion equipment to convert uranium energy into electricity is far more compact, requires no large collection areas and does not require either cheap or expensive electricity storage devices for night or cloudy weather. It would be cheaper even to put nuclear reactors in space and beam the power to earth than to put solar collectors into space to do the same thing. With nuclear fuel economy, the amount of nuclear byproducts generated for a US resident’s lifetime use of energy would only fill a standard soft drink can.

All people, animals and especially plants have alway been radio-active because of the potassium in their bodies which amount to about 25 internal nuclear explosions per pound per second, and life processes know how to deal with it and more because it has been going on since life started on earth. We can deal with the immeasurable addition to radio-activity that a thousand times more nuclear power plants would bring to our lives because it would be far less than the additional radiation received by living in Denver rather than New Jersey. We can also figure out a way to mix a can full of atoms with enough dirt so that it does not represent more of a hazzard than a car ride. ..HG..

There is not enough fertile cropable land area on the earth to produce enough grass to be changed to oil to match the consumption of the United States.

Most of the uranium 235 present at the creation of the earth then gathered from exploding neutron stars has decayed into lead; The human race might as well use it in nuclear reactors rather than letting it go to waste. Uranium 238 and thorium change into lead far more slowly but they also will be wasted if not used.

The conversion equipment to convert uranium energy into electricity is far more compact, requires no large collection areas and does not require either cheap or expensive electricity storage devices for night or cloudy weather. It would be cheaper even to put nuclear reactors in space and beam the power to earth than to put solar collectors into space to do the same thing. With nuclear fuel economy, the amount of nuclear byproducts generated for a US resident’s lifetime use of energy would only fill a standard soft drink can.

All people, animals and especially plants have alway been radio-active because of the potassium in their bodies which amount to about 25 internal nuclear explosions per pound per second, and life processes know how to deal with it and more because it has been going on since life started on earth. We can deal with the immeasurable addition to radio-activity that a thousand times more nuclear power plants would bring to our lives because it would be far less than the additional radiation received by living in Denver rather than New Jersey. We can also figure out a way to mix a can full of atoms with enough dirt so that it does not represent more of a hazzard than a car ride. ..HG..

“This summary comes, not from just another renewable energy blogger like myself, overwhelmed by the gushing hose of news out of Steven Chu’s newly invigorated Department of Energy…”

1) The DOE is back coal-to-gasoline projects as well as tar sands and shale oils. How does this fit with any program to reduce carbon emissions? [SK: There is still a Fossil Energy dept at DOE, but now it funds CO2 reduction innovations like this: http://cleantechnica.com/2009/10/04/doe-introduces-big-oil-to-new-energy-source-waste-heat-geothermal/

2) Renewable energy loans have been held up by the DOE, leading to numerous complaints from renewable energy producers. [SK??? Not from what I hear – I interview RE co.s for a living]

3) The DOE public-private proposals are partnerships between specific companies and the DOE – and those specific companies will gain exclusive control over any patents generated, correct? Thus leaving the non-politically connected out in the cold. [ No, many patents are held by the university where the funded research began that generated the spin-off company]

4) The DOE has refused to initiate a program of funding solar, wind and photosynthetic fuel research at our nation’s universities – when what is needed is something like the NIH or NSF – and independent agency with a multi-billion dollar budget that funds researchers at public and private universities and is not under the control of political appointees. [ This is nonsense. Nearly all the funding is for university level R&D doing exactly that – funding innovations – read the links]

“This summary comes, not from just another renewable energy blogger like myself, overwhelmed by the gushing hose of news out of Steven Chu’s newly invigorated Department of Energy…”

1) The DOE is back coal-to-gasoline projects as well as tar sands and shale oils. How does this fit with any program to reduce carbon emissions? [SK: There is still a Fossil Energy dept at DOE, but now it funds CO2 reduction innovations like this: http://cleantechnica.com/2009/10/04/doe-introduces-big-oil-to-new-energy-source-waste-heat-geothermal/

2) Renewable energy loans have been held up by the DOE, leading to numerous complaints from renewable energy producers. [SK??? Not from what I hear – I interview RE co.s for a living]

3) The DOE public-private proposals are partnerships between specific companies and the DOE – and those specific companies will gain exclusive control over any patents generated, correct? Thus leaving the non-politically connected out in the cold. [ No, many patents are held by the university where the funded research began that generated the spin-off company]

4) The DOE has refused to initiate a program of funding solar, wind and photosynthetic fuel research at our nation’s universities – when what is needed is something like the NIH or NSF – and independent agency with a multi-billion dollar budget that funds researchers at public and private universities and is not under the control of political appointees. [ This is nonsense. Nearly all the funding is for university level R&D doing exactly that – funding innovations – read the links]

“This summary comes, not from just another renewable energy blogger like myself, overwhelmed by the gushing hose of news out of Steven Chu’s newly invigorated Department of Energy…”

1) The DOE is back coal-to-gasoline projects as well as tar sands and shale oils. How does this fit with any program to reduce carbon emissions? [SK: There is still a Fossil Energy dept at DOE, but now it funds CO2 reduction innovations like this: http://cleantechnica.com/2009/10/04/doe-introduces-big-oil-to-new-energy-source-waste-heat-geothermal/

2) Renewable energy loans have been held up by the DOE, leading to numerous complaints from renewable energy producers. [SK??? Not from what I hear – I interview RE co.s for a living]

3) The DOE public-private proposals are partnerships between specific companies and the DOE – and those specific companies will gain exclusive control over any patents generated, correct? Thus leaving the non-politically connected out in the cold. [ No, many patents are held by the university where the funded research began that generated the spin-off company]

4) The DOE has refused to initiate a program of funding solar, wind and photosynthetic fuel research at our nation’s universities – when what is needed is something like the NIH or NSF – and independent agency with a multi-billion dollar budget that funds researchers at public and private universities and is not under the control of political appointees. [ This is nonsense. Nearly all the funding is for university level R&D doing exactly that – funding innovations – read the links]