This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA.
The opinions stated are personal opinions. Therefore,
The BLOG author may or may not agree with them before making the decision to post them.
Comments not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted.
Blog author serves as a moderator.
For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com
Blog rules
Stay on topic.
No profanity, threatening language, pornography.
NO NAME CALLING.
No political debate.
Posts and comments are posted several times a day.
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Who is next?
Anonymously contributed:
Who is next?
Episode 1is now complete and Obama is back again. Stay tuned for episode 2, when we learn the fate of Chu.
How will it turn out?
10 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Solyndra may have been the the public flap that everyone sees, but there are other situations and questions that raise questions or doubts about Chu as an effective administrator and a credible candidate for continuing in his role. My understanding is that DoE funds were not only used to support the alternative energy industries (expected of the Energy Department) but also biotech companies run by some of Chu's former associates. While I agree with the principle of government using its resources to help promote industry and commerce particularly in emerging and rapidly growing scientific and technology areas, I can't help but wonder why biotech, and why a former colleague, under the umbrella of the energy department. And that's just the start. We seem to be edging up closer to a line beyond which you have what amounts to a scandal. And the lack of transparency doesn't help at all here.
I think the poster is referring to Jay Keasling, and whether or not the support by DoE in bioenergy is clear and without any conflict of interest, particularly in light of the seemingly blurred lines between Keasling's company and his role as an employee of a public university. I didn't really think anything about this until after Solyndra blew up. I don't question Keasling's reputation as an exceptional scientist, and he is probably the right horse to bet on. But it also gave me reason to start taking a second look at the way DoE was providing support and financing in a very wide range of DoE energy initiatives, and whether or not DoE actually did its homework to address mitigate risks that are brought on by perverse incentives (case in point).
First we have to lay off 200 people more due to the fact some funding didn't come through and then we have to look at more to go due to sequestration. After the dust settles we'll start looking at what the new mission will be and who at the top must go.
First we have to lay off 200 people more due to the fact some funding didn't come through and then we have to look at more to go due to sequestration. After the dust settles we'll start looking at what the new mission will be and who at the top must go.
First we have to lay off 200 people more due to the fact some funding didn't come through and then we have to look at more to go due to sequestration. After the dust settles we'll start looking at what the new mission will be and who at the top must go.
nkspar 109First we have to lay off 200 people more due to the fact some funding didn't come through and then we have to look at more to go due to sequestration. After the dust settles we'll start looking at what the new mission will be and who at the top must go.
Add the 200 to the 1800 that were laid off at LLNL at the brilliant DOE/NNSA cabal of Brooks, Bodman, Pryzbylek, D'Agostino's directions to let a NEW management contract to industry, thereby incurring not only $200m per year of unreimbursed but new and avoidable fees, unnecessary taxes, pension costs and medical insurance increases; with the doorstops named Leidle, Rossi and Soderstom to implement the carnage on the loyal hardworking, naive staff, felling 1800 professionals in on stroke.
In an ending to a "perfect storm" Presidential election would be to see (Almost) Dr. Bret Knapp nominated for the Secretary of Energy or Defense. Why not, "yes we can"!
It is abundantly obvious that the DOE under Chu has attracted more than its fair share of negative attention. It is certainly fair to question whether the DOE should be engaging in large scale venture capitalist type activities, when the solutions to the problem (energy) are ultimately dictated by the economics, not science.
I would be surprised if Chu survives because second term presidencies are vulnerable to scandal-creep muzzling their power in Congress.
10 comments:
Solyndra may have been the the public flap that everyone sees, but there are other situations and questions that raise questions or doubts about Chu as an effective administrator and a credible candidate for continuing in his role. My understanding is that DoE funds were not only used to support the alternative energy industries (expected of the Energy Department) but also biotech companies run by some of Chu's former associates. While I agree with the principle of government using its resources to help promote industry and commerce particularly in emerging and rapidly growing scientific and technology areas, I can't help but wonder why biotech, and why a former colleague, under the umbrella of the energy department. And that's just the start. We seem to be edging up closer to a line beyond which you have what amounts to a scandal. And the lack of transparency doesn't help at all here.
You write: "My understanding..."
Where are the sources for this?
Without them this is just hearsay
I think the poster is referring to Jay Keasling, and whether or not the support by DoE in bioenergy is clear and without any conflict of interest, particularly in light of the seemingly blurred lines between Keasling's company and his role as an employee of a public university. I didn't really think anything about this until after Solyndra blew up. I don't question Keasling's reputation as an exceptional scientist, and he is probably the right horse to bet on. But it also gave me reason to start taking a second look at the way DoE was providing support and financing in a very wide range of DoE energy initiatives, and whether or not DoE actually did its homework to address mitigate risks that are brought on by perverse incentives (case in point).
First we have to lay off 200 people more due to the fact some funding didn't come through and then we have to look at more to go due to sequestration. After the dust settles we'll start looking at what the new mission will be and who at the top must go.
First we have to lay off 200 people more due to the fact some funding didn't come through and then we have to look at more to go due to sequestration. After the dust settles we'll start looking at what the new mission will be and who at the top must go.
First we have to lay off 200 people more due to the fact some funding didn't come through and then we have to look at more to go due to sequestration. After the dust settles we'll start looking at what the new mission will be and who at the top must go.
nkspar 109First we have to lay off 200 people more due to the fact some funding didn't come through and then we have to look at more to go due to sequestration. After the dust settles we'll start looking at what the new mission will be and who at the top must go.
Add the 200 to the 1800 that were laid off at LLNL at the brilliant DOE/NNSA cabal of Brooks, Bodman, Pryzbylek, D'Agostino's directions to let a NEW management contract to industry, thereby incurring not only $200m per year of unreimbursed but new and avoidable fees, unnecessary taxes, pension costs and medical insurance increases; with the doorstops named Leidle, Rossi and Soderstom to implement the carnage on the loyal hardworking, naive staff, felling 1800 professionals in on stroke.
In an ending to a "perfect storm" Presidential election would be to see (Almost) Dr. Bret Knapp nominated for the Secretary of Energy or Defense. Why not, "yes we can"!
It is abundantly obvious that the DOE under Chu has attracted more than its fair share of negative attention. It is certainly fair to question whether the DOE should be engaging in large scale venture capitalist type activities, when the solutions to the problem (energy) are ultimately dictated by the economics, not science.
I would be surprised if Chu survives because second term presidencies are vulnerable to scandal-creep muzzling their power in Congress.
Post a Comment