Dec 11th, 2008 at 3:01 am
Steven Chu
Nobel Prize-winning physicist Steven Chu seems to me to be a great choice for Energy Secretary. First, he’s brilliant and has brilliant credentials. Second, he’s got the sound views. Watch him talking:
Unfortunately, the Department of Energy isn’t actually the policy juggernaut one might think it is. In the real world, the department’s responsibilities are pretty limited, and a lot of them relate to our nuclear weapons arsenal rather than energy policy as such. Still, insofar as a lot of what cabinet secretaries do is use the bully pulpit on their key issues, Chu should be a force for good.
40 Responses to “Steven Chu”
Register
RSSLogin
Advertisement
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Books By Matthew Yglesias
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Abortion
Afghanistan
Basketball
Blanche Lincoln
Budget
China
climate
Congress
Crime
DC
Demographics
Economics
Economy
Energy
Environment
EU
Finance
Football
Gender
Health Care
History
Inequality
International Law
International Relations
Iran
Israel
Media
Monetary Policy
National Security
NATO
NBA
Palestine
Political Reform
Public Health
Public Opinion
Race
Regulation
Russia
Sarah Palin
Sports
Stimulus
taxes
Technology
Trade
transportation
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Contact Matthew Yglesias
Use this form to contact blog author Matthew Yglesias.
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
December 11th, 2008 at 3:34 am
LBL, which Chu headed up, is one of the most respected national labs in the quality of its science, and its work on energy conservation. This is great news.
December 11th, 2008 at 5:47 am
Who cares if the Department of Energy “isn’t the policy juggernaut one might think it is.” The Energy Secretary rakes it in! Have you learned nothing from the Blagojevich scandal?
December 11th, 2008 at 7:00 am
I heard this guy speak when I was a grad student. He sure did some interesting stuff. Lasar-cooled molecules are almost another phase of matter. Like frozen gas.
As I recall it works because you tune the lasers to just a little below the molecule’s absorption frequency. Then if a molecule is moving toward the laser source, the Doppler effect makes the molecule think the light is faster than it is, which bumps it up to the absorption frequency, so it absorbs the light and with it momentum in the opposite direction, so the molecule slows down. Once it slows down enough, it stops absorbing the light because the Doppler effect isn’t making the light seem higher-frequency to the molecule than it is any more. Then all you need are lasers pointing in all six possible directions to slow the molecule in all three dimensions. Slower molecule means you can make finer spectroscopic measurements without introducing the complicated intermolecular interactions you get by freezing it. The enabling technology was tunable lasers of sufficient brightness.
It’s fitting that he directed LBL given that Charlie Townes, who invented the laser, has been at Berkeley for many years. Actually now that I think of it, Berkeley has a long history of achieving new low temperatures; one of its main buildings is Giauque Hall and that’s what Bill Giauque got his Nobel for.
Dr. Chu had a nerdy, rapid talking style and a sort of assumed charisma that is very common among successful academics.
December 11th, 2008 at 8:05 am
Re SoMC
Then if a molecule is moving toward the laser source, the Doppler effect makes the molecule think the light is faster than it is, which bumps it up to the absorption frequency, so it absorbs the light and with it momentum in the opposite direction, so the molecule slows down
Wrong explanation. The Doppler effect makes the molecule think that the light has a higher frequency then it actually does. The velocity of light is a universal constant and independent of the speed of the source or the receiver; Einsteins’ special theory of relativity.
December 11th, 2008 at 8:28 am
Re DTM
Fair enough.
By the way, the appointment of Prof. Chu seems like an excellent choice. Now if President Elect Osama appoints Dr. Harold Varmus, also a Nobel Prize winner as his science adviser, that will verify that the president elect intends to attract the best and the brightest to his administration. Graduates of piece of shit law schools like Liberty and Regent need not apply.
December 11th, 2008 at 8:48 am
Chu does seem like a great choice. I’m wondering if he might be something of an apology for Wen Ho Lee/Bill Richardson, too.
December 11th, 2008 at 9:10 am
Do you think that this ‘unfortunate’ situation will continue under Obama? Or, perhaps, that this choice is a straight up signal that the departments responsibilities are going to expand? That’s what I think.
December 11th, 2008 at 9:20 am
Re Matthew’s comment “Unfortunately, the Department of Energy isn’t actually the policy juggernaut one might think it is. In the real world, the department’s responsibilities are pretty limited, ”
—————-
Sigh.
The Department controls/issues a shitload of government research grants –both in basic physics and specifically in development of new energy sources. Until recently, this area has been flat but is now getting major new resources.
Chu is an excellent appointee to judge the allocation of those resources — i.e, to separate out the brilliant from the not-so.
“Since 2004, Chu has been director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, which has 4,000 employees and a budget of $650 million. The laboratory under Chu has been a center of research into biofuels and solar energy technologies. Chu has been a vocal advocate for more research into alternative energy, arguing that a shift away from fossil fuels is essential to combat global warming”
Several years ago, I argued on Talking Points Memo that US government policy is corrupt and stupid. We’re spending the equivalent of $38 PER GALLON on Middle Eastern gasoline — in the form of military operations to secure the area. Consumption NOT Investment. Meanwhile, our energy R&D budget has been flat since Carter started wearing a sweater in 1977.
I glad Obama has discarded the liberal arts dumbshits and finally found a REAL intellect — i.e., a scientist with more than two brain cells to rub together. Good pick.
December 11th, 2008 at 9:26 am
I’m on board the Chu Chu train.
December 11th, 2008 at 9:27 am
I think that’s a given. Along with being a Nobel laureate, Chu is also a proven administrator and an advocate of alternative energy programs.
December 11th, 2008 at 9:36 am
I do wonder if Arthur Ashkin will show up at Chu’s confirmation hearings. Arthur wasn’t mentioned in that 1997 Nobel Award, was he? hee hee
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Ashkin
December 11th, 2008 at 9:42 am
Chu also seems to be in bed with some strange bed fellows:
“Chu is currently pushing his scientists at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and industry to develop technologies to reduce the impact of climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Chief in Chu’s campaign is an unprecedented research pact reached between UC Berkeley, oil industry giant BP, the Lawrence Berkeley Lab and the University of Illinois, which has drawn considerable controversy.
Nearly US$400 million in new lab space will expand energy-related molecular work centered at Lawrence Berkeley that involves partners around the world; a US$160 million Energy Biosciences Institute helios building is to be funded by BP and subsidized with $70 million of California state funds, house up to 50 BP scientists in a private lab, and will include Chu’s separate solar-energy program, but is reportedly on hold due to problems with the approved Environmental Impact Review.[2] ”
Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Chu#cite_note-5
December 11th, 2008 at 9:44 am
“An idea that sprang up over lunch at a Bell Labs cafeteria a little more than a decade ago has led Steven Chu to the most coveted honor in science. On Oct. 15, the 1997 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to Chu, now at Stanford University, and two others, William Phillips and Claude Cohen-Tannoudji, for their development of methods to cool and trap atoms with laser light.
The research that drew the attention of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences began at Bell Labs in Holmdel. A dozen years ago, Arthur Ashkin and Chu used to discuss physics regularly at the Holmdel cafeteria. They were interested in manipulating atoms at low temperatures.
An idea that arose during one of those lunches led to a series of experiments by Chu, Ashkin, John Bjorkholm, Alex Cable, and Leo Holberg. Chu left Bell Labs in 1987 to take up a professorship at Stanford, where he continued his work in low-temperature physics.”
Ref: http://www.alcatel-lucent.com/wps/portal/!ut/p/kcxml/04_Sj9SPykssy0xPLMnMz0vM0Y_QjzKLd4y3cDcFSYGZzgH6kShiBvGOCBFfj_zcVP0gfW_9AP2C3NCIckdHRQAzW18m/delta/base64xml/L3dJdyEvd0ZNQUFzQUMvNElVRS82X0FfN01U?LMSG_CABINET=Bell_Labs&LMSG_CONTENT_FILE=News_Features/News_Feature_Detail_000117&lu_lang_code=en_WW
December 11th, 2008 at 9:57 am
Re Don Williams
What’s this, the blogs resident Bolshevik and I actually agree on something. We can only hope that President Elect Osamas’ science adviser will have equally sterling credentials and that the soon to be president will listen and take their advice.
December 11th, 2008 at 10:01 am
Re SLC’s comment “What’s this, the blogs resident Bolshevik and I actually agree on something. ”
—————-
Damm, that scares me.
Maybe I better make a doctor’s appointment and schedule a MRI scan.
December 11th, 2008 at 10:02 am
A Physics nobelist may well be someone who can finally take the lead in reducing the US nuclear arsenal, which is essential to any successful attempt to reduce global proliferation.
December 11th, 2008 at 10:32 am
For the non-juggernautness of DoE, see this chart: the green python got one good meal in the 1970s, and has subsisted on voles and chipmunks ever since.
For what it’s worth, defense R&D is above $80B these days, comfortably larger than all these categories combined. That’s so we don’t end up having to buy our F-35s and missile defense systems and microwave crowd-control pain rays from China.
December 11th, 2008 at 10:47 am
Re Monte’s comment
————
DOE also allocates a lot of the budget for basic science — high energy physics, fusion,etc.
Unfortunately our moron of a President –aided by the Democratic Congress — showed last December that anyone going into physics is an idiot.
http://fire.pppl.gov/doe_budget_2008_%20nature_122407.pdf
I’m sure thousands of our young geniuses will get the message — work for a hedge fund and help humanity.
December 11th, 2008 at 10:49 am
Money quote from the above link:
“This is probably the worst budget for science that anyone can
remember,” says Michael Lubell, a spokesman at the American Physical Society in Washington DC. “It absolutely devastates and probably wipes out American high-energy
physics.”
Look at how ILC and Fermilab got screwed.
Yet our cocksucking Congress throws hundreds of $billions away in Iraq.
December 11th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Re Don Williams
On the subject of science adviser, I suspect that the blogs resident Bolshevik and I would part company as he undoubtedly would not find Prof. Varmus acceptable, based on the latters’ ethnic backbround.
December 11th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
I think it’s amazing that Obama’s going to have a science advisor who is both known as a great manager (of the Berkley National Lab) and is a brilliant, brilliant guy who actually understands the implications of funding one science project over another. I expect to see very, very smart, targeted funding through the DoE over the next 8 years.
December 11th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Dr. Steven Chu seems like an excellent choice for head of the Department of Energy. However, he seems to have bought in on the Climate Change (aka Global Warming) hoax. The Greenland Ice Core data over the last 500,000 years, the solar energy changes due to slight orbital earth to sun distance changes and due to slight earth tilt axis changes explain the much larger past cyclical observed climate changes. They do not seem to be caused by industrial activities.
***
His ideas for better farmed ethanol sources are good–although the pollution from these sources is still there–during processing and car use. This is much better than the corn based ethanol scam we have now.
***
At present only more NUCLEAR POWER PLANT CONSTRUCTION can provide more cheap energy. This is proven, safe, and economically good technology–use it. And more use of our own natural resources (offshore oil, ANWAR oil, coal conversion to oil, etc.) should be done in an environmentally responsible manner. This also fixes our balance of trade problems (strengthens the dollar) and defunds unfriendly and terrorist supporting states (Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Iran, Russia, etc.). And this will provide good U.S. jobs benefits also.
***
As far as better energy efficiency and sources–bring it on if it is economically doable–when it is proven by testing. No “PIE IN THE SKY” stuff–no government subsidies for unproven, unsafe, or polluting technology–the new sources must compete directly with existing energy sources.
***
Dr. Chu has a better education than I do–I am a practical Electrical Engineer (BSEE/MSEE) with power company experience a long time ago, and missile / radar experience over the last 43 years. However, sometimes practical wins out over theoretical approaches to problems.
***
A problem was given to a mathematician and an engineer. A great looking friendly nude girl has her back to the wall on one side of a room. The engineer or mathematician can go over to the girl and have their way with her–however, they can not just walk over to the girl.
***
They must start with their back to the opposite wall. On their first move they can move half the distance to the girl. On the second move they can move half the remaining distance–and so on.
***
The mathematician analyzed the problem and stated, “It is impossible to reach the girl–there will always be a slight distance remaining!”–so he didn’t try.
***
The practical engineer knew better–yes–a slight distance will always remain. However, he knew he could get close enough to get the job done!
***
I wish Mr. Chu good luck–and good judgement–like the engineer.
***
Rocketman
December 11th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
So the mathematician didn’t know calculus?
FAIL
December 11th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
He just said 3 degrees C is 11 degrees F! That’s off by a factor of 2!
December 11th, 2008 at 5:18 pm
Re John Bibb
Apparently, Mr. Bibb is a denier that greenhouse gases are a major contributor to global warming. The mechanisms that Mr. Bibb cites have been completely debunked over at Real Climate. I wonder if Mr. Bibb is also an evolution denier, as all too many engineers are.
http://www.realclimate.org/
Unlike Mr. Bibb, who says he is an electrical engineer and thus is no more competent to pontificate on the subject of global warming then he is to pontificate on the General Theory of Relativity, the people who post on that web site are climatologists who are competent.
December 11th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Nice. I posted the first comment in this thread this morning – and Matt deletes it. It had two references to Richard Smalley’s nanotech energy initiative – useful info.
Gutless punk.
December 12th, 2008 at 10:12 am
Does the DOE have the responsibility of collecting all the royalties and back-royalties that the E&P companies owe the US Government? If so, then we may have found a way to fund the bailout.
January 13th, 2009 at 9:34 am
laptop battery
laptop batteries
February 8th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
laptop battery
February 9th, 2009 at 3:08 am
laptop battery
February 10th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Please Mr. Chu quit scaring Americans into believing that ‘California Ag. could disappear by end the century”. You have not evidence that humans are the cause of global warming. If you do then please share this with us all as compared to milleniums of global warming and cooling caused by nature.
March 11th, 2009 at 4:17 am
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
March 17th, 2009 at 2:20 am
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
tramadol
March 22nd, 2009 at 5:55 am
tramadol
I want to say – thank you for this!
March 23rd, 2009 at 4:22 am
viagra
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:56 am
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:00 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 9th, 2009 at 4:51 am
thanks !! very helpful post! viagra
April 10th, 2009 at 1:16 am
My friend on Facebook shared this link with me and I’m not dissapointed that I came to your blog.
April 19th, 2009 at 9:02 am
98s2Oc efqukxauzzsv, [url=http://vvzopmdcqjms.com/]vvzopmdcqjms[/url], [link=http://nmvttimmqbcg.com/]nmvttimmqbcg[/link], http://uzrngfoeknkf.com/