A Nobel Laureate Physicist in Obama's Cabinet?

In a previous column, I made the case for why I believed Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA) would make a great pick for Energy Secretary. I commended Inslee's intelligence, genuine passion in the subject and prescience as tremendous qualities that would serve the President-elect well in crafting his ambitious energy agenda.

And, though I stand by my glowing appraisal, I am more than happy to support the pick of Dr. Steven Chu, a 1997 Nobel Laureate in physics and the director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, if, as the rumors have it, he is being seriously considered for the position.

In many ways, it's hard to think of a more qualified candidate. Dr. Chu would obviously bring a superb scientific pedigree to the White House (something that has been sorely lacking over the last 8 years), a deep understanding of the climate and energy crises and a solid background in both business, having served as the head of Bell Labs' electronics research laboratory, and academia. Unlike most of the other candidates under consideration, he has no Washington/legislative experience to speak of (save for his frequent dealings with the DOE), which could become a problem down the line when the inevitable Congressional negotiations take place.

As director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, he accelerated research into a wide variety of promising renewable energy technologies, including cutting-edge artificial photosynthesis (to study the feasibility of hydrogen fuel), solar and second generation biofuels. An early believer, he made tackling climate change one of the Lab's primary objectives, investing significant time and resources into new initiatives aimed at fostering collaborations between his staffers and other researchers at universities or in industry, and he has remained at the forefront of this battle ever since.

He has received some flack from environmentalists for orchestrating the creation of the Energy Biosciences Institute, a collaboration between UC Berkeley, LBNL, the University of Illinois and, most notably, BP (which will support the institute to the tune of $500 million, spread over a 10-year period), which is set to open in 2010.

EBI is only one of three new research institutions to be established under his watch, however; his support was also instrumental in getting the Joint BioEnergy Institute (JBEI), a DOE-academic partnership, and Helios, a LBNL-UC Berkeley solar energy initiative, off the ground. (Both are also set to begin construction within the next few years.) He has advised and is familiar with many of the latest promising biofuel startups, including Amyris Biotechnologies and LS9 (both of which are based in the Bay Area), and has a good grasp of the cleantech business landscape.

More important, from my point of view, has been his vocal advocacy for climate change mitigation and for funding more basic research and science education. As Wonk Room's Brad Johnson noted this weekend, Dr. Chu has spoken at length about the dangers of runaway climate change, calling a 5 degree Celsius temperature increase "the difference between where we are today and where we were in the last ice age" and something that would put "hundreds of millions to billions of people" at grave risk in a recent presentation at the National Clean Energy Summit this summer.

Speaking to the Copenhagen Climate Council a month ago, he said that the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report likely underestimate the severity of the risk posed by climate change, warning that the planet could face "sudden, unpredictable, and irreversible disaster" if governments did not work together to resolve it. Temperatures could rise by as much as 4.5°C by the end of the century -- and up to 6.1°C under current trends. He urged the international community to slash greenhouse gas emissions by investing in energy efficiency and existing clean energy technologies.

Comparing our current predicament to that of a homeowner who finds out that his house is in need of expensive repair due to faulty wiring, Dr. Chu had the following to say about the difficult choices we face:

What most of us would do when faced with this situation is the intuitively obvious solution - put off the things we might have liked to do with the money, and do what it takes to make the repairs. We wouldn't take risks with our own lives and the lives of our children.

We face the same choice now: to go on living as we are, looking for lower-cost options today that will help fight the fire when it starts, or to address the risks in the house we live in, and make the repairs we can, to make the house safe for ourselves and our descendents. In our houses, we think these things are sound investments. We can adopt the same attitude for the planet.

Reasonable investments now - in energy efficiency, new technology, new sources of power, and better infrastructure - can make a dramatic difference for the future. Just as in our houses, making these investments will require changes of all of us - in our behaviors, our jobs, and our attitudes. But these changes are minimal compared to the dramatic changes that would confront us and our descendants if we do nothing.

After all, if your house burns down, you can go live elsewhere. But in the end, there's nowhere else to go for the billions of people living on a dramatically changed planet Earth.

Follow Jeremy Jacquot on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jejacquot

Comments

[Stephen C. Rose - Huffpost Blogger]

Atomic Insights Calls Chu Choice Great

http://stephencrose.wordpress.com/2008/12/15/atomic-insights-calls-chu-choice-great/

[pt380]

As an Obama supporter, and advocate for tackling climate change, there are important reasons to question Chu's nomination, related to corporate ties, management issues, bioenergy, and transparent and consultative decision making. Chu's lab, LBNL, is one of 3 institutions receiving $500 million from British Petroleum (announced at a ceremony with Gov Blagojevich last year). Though touted as a biofuels project, the research includes work on microbes to enhance oil extraction. And Chu has said almost nothing about the significant impact of biofuels on rising food prices, which, recent UN reports state, have caused the number of hungry people to increase by 40 million this year. The lab has come under scrutiny for mismanagement, and the $500m deal also raised much controversy about improper procedure and distortion of research priorities by private companies operating at public universities. Chu and others managed to get the CA state to subsidize - in this time of budget crises and record oil profits - the building housing BP scientists with $70 million, though its flawed environmental review may hold this up. Chu held no public meetings for citizens to contribute comments while the bid to BP was being developed, and the contractual terms were only made public after being leaked to the press. There are a number of other concerns that need to be addressed.

[45245]

"hungry people to increase by 40 million this year" how many of the 40 are US hungry?

[pt380]

I"m not sure why this question is relevant - global food markets are highly integrated. That said, there are a number of people who go hungry in the US each year, I believe the figure is around 35 million or so. How much that has increased this year, I'm not sure.

[RiderWithinHRPufinstuf]

*all* sources should be pursued, obviously including nuclear; look,
the whole world is going nuclear & to space, and
we are still stuck with '50s techniques in both areas: a)
lightwater reactors and b)
Eisenhower's Saturn 5 rockets.

renewable energy is partly a crock, because
of the oil cartel's ridiculous trademark, Fossilized Fuels,
like it has any thing to do with dinosaurs;
is it not just biomass?

the Peak Oil doctrine is that of the oil cartel,
using their own statistics; namely, mister Hubbert,
of Royal dutch Shell, which is half-owned by the British. now,
the cartel is mainly British and Dutch, not OPEC, the former because
they are still the largest stockmarket on earht, and
the latter because it's such a huge port for tankers.

thus:
well, Executive Order 12333. now,
I asked someone at KPFK to look into the legal aspect
of the Veep's Principals Cmte.

Give Trickier Dick's policy, of launching the 3rd British Invasion
of Sudan, a chance -- using American middleschooler bodies,
because of their own PC lobbying of their parents, because
a God-am insurance company paid for their curriculum
on Darfur.

thus:
I saw the LAtribcoTimes beat OJ up for the civil trial,
solemnizing the judge's decision to deny the forensic expert
to completely demolish the National Enquirer's "shoe pix,"
on the grounds that he was a money-grubbing JFK assassination researcher!

well, only 24 hours to impeach Trickier Dick Cheeny
from the Nixon Administration, metaphorically typing!

[joebaggadonuts]

I think this appointment should not be made until after January 20. Too much risk to anger the president occupant of our WH.

[JuniorNorman]

Dr Chu would be great. Im gonna read his book.

[alvdh1]

I would like to know what his perspective is about freeing the grid to everyone so that we can install wind and solar panels in exchange for full retail electric prices for any excess capacity. If it isn't th core of his plan then his Nobel award isn't worth the value of the material it was made from.

[KillTheMessenger]

If you were to trade the current subsidy against grid access at market prices, you would be a sucker. You would trade a 10-15 cents/kWh subsidy for a 15 cents/kWh loss.

I am all for it, by the way... it's just a sad reality that WE, small scale producers of energy, can not even break even with a flat price structure. There are certainly commercial size systems which could profit from such a law. If you go to Las Vegas you will find plenty of commercial warehouses on giant plots of land that could be covered with solar cells and that would return net electrical energy at a slight profit to these operators. I am sure there is similar capacity for several GW of solar power available all over the country. But in order to make home scale production feasible, we need a different (and more expensive) subsidy structure.

[jnah]

woohoo dr. chu!

[Doofus]

Since the Energy Department is also responsible for US
nuclear weapons development, hopefully whoever is
chosen will push for ecologically friendly nukes.

[alvdh1]

Where on Earth did you ever come to the conclusion that even the remotest possibility exists for ecologically friendly nukes. I suggest that you read Dr. John W. Gofman's book, "Poisoned Power", before you make a push for this dirtiest of dirty energy sources. The book is online to read for free. I would advise that you read his curriculum vitae first so that you have no doubt about his scientific credibility.

[vegasobserver]

We need nukes that when you drop 'em, daisies sprout everywhere!

No nukes may be good nukes, but flower-sprouting nukes is GREAT nukes!!!

[KillTheMessenger]

He is just having fun. Relax.

Although, maybe he is not. The production and stewardship of the nuclear stockpile comes at an enormous economic and ecological cost. We could (and if we were serious about our children) would have to improve some of that a lot. But for that we need to find tens of billions in the budget...

[Doofus]

I was using the term 'nuke' in the weapons context. I'm not entirely convinced
that nuclear energy is necessarily a bad power-generation choice. It *could*
be if only all of the horrific attendant problems could be worked out, but even
then would carry considerable 'political' risks. In other words, it doesn't have
to be dirty, but even if it isn't, it could remain very dangerous.

The bigger the genie gets, the harder to get him back in the bottle.

[Wilburrr]

Hey Stevie! You are the best candidate for Energy Secretary to come out of ANY Hemlock Park softball game!!

[theone718]

Obama doesn't have a lack of great participants. That's great to know.

[vjoseph]

The bench is deep

[jcwtts1]

Gotta give him a strong washington deputy, someone who knows how to actually run a bureaucracy.

[newpotusplease]

if this ends up being the case:

I hope Dr. Chu adopts the Obama administration's ethics

and leaves behind the University of California ways of doing business, where there is so much corruption.

[robbor]

i'm getting goose bumps...we are finally awakening from the 8 year coma

[canucklivinginUSA]

Hey guys, let's send some positive vibes towards the Obama transition team to pick this guy. LETS DO THIS

[Mildmannered]

would he be the only cabinet secretary from Calif?