Skip to main content

Poor performance

Anonymously contributed:
Isn't it funny how poorly our leaders perform?
Perhaps they shouldn't be paid anything.

Scooby's note: what do you think?

Comments

Anonymous said…
What are you talking about? The PBI metrics are looking better than ever for the "for-profit LLC run "science labs"!

PBIs, Baby! It's all that matters and all that NNSA really cares about. BTW, have you noticed that not a single PBI involves science and research? Message heard, NNSA, loud and clear.
Anonymous said…
Is Chu a Nobel bust?

Energy policy?
Nuclear power resolved?
Weapons complex stabilized?.
Renewable energy lab?
DOE mediocrity eliminated?.
Spent fuel storage resolved?
Gas prices are sky high?
The best small automotive diesels thrive in...Asia, Europe, South America?
Large scale ethanol for auto use?
The LLCs still exist.

Is he trying? White roads? Really? Is he the Mandarin's scientific curio?

Even O'bama tried something.
Anonymous said…
Is Chu a Nobel bust?

Chu earned his Nobel as a scientist. Bravo. It may or may not be relevant when it comes to leading/coercing/enduring the bureaucracy.

Many of the topics listed are broad policy issues with many non-technical influences. I think Chu is more sincerely interested in, and knowledgeable of, energy policy than any other Secretary until one goes back to Schlesinger. The nation has floundered around on nuclear power, spent fuel, etc. for decades. Chu was suppose to resolve that in two years? Large scale ethanol is as much about agricultural subsidies and trade policy toward Brazil.

He's trying, but D.C. is probably giving him a big headache.
Anonymous said…
Sorry, all of those topics are his portfolio.

People follow leaders, politicians form consensus.

If he said. "We failed. DOE is useless, it needs to go." and began shutting it down, it would at least begin somethingpositive, and by the way, not hurt the country one bit.
Anonymous said…
January 29, 2011 9:47 PM

Yes!? needs want to do. It is time to sit on a pot or find bathroom. To post to drunk by 10pm.

January 31, 2011 6:41 AM

Wow, what?? Nothing in your post applies to the post you reference. Maybe you are the one with the head in the toilet? Still drunk at 7:00 am?
Anonymous said…
He's trying, but D.C. is probably giving him a big headache.

January 29, 2011 9:34 PM

Nothing compared to the headache he's giving us!!

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...

Trump is to gut the labs.

The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.

tcp1 looking good

I just received my annual TCP-1 letter from LLNS and a summary of the LLNS Pension Plan. Looked in pretty good shape in 2013. About 35% overfunded (funding target attainment percentage = 134.92%). This was a decrease from 2012 where it was 51% overfunded (funding target attainment percentage = 151.59%). They did note that the 2012 change in the law on how liabilities are calculated using interest rates improved the plan's position. Without the change the funding target attainment percentages would have been 118% (2012) and 105% (2013). 2013 assets = $2,057,866,902 2013 liabilities = $1,525,162,784 vs 2012 assets = $1,844,924,947 2012 liabilities = $1,217,043,150 It was also noted that a slightly different calculation method ("fair market value") designed to show a clearer picture of the plan' status as December 31, 2013 had; Assets = $2,403,098,433 Liabilities = $2,068,984,256 Funding ratio = 116.15% Its a closed plan with 3,781 participants. Of that number, 3,151 wer...