Skip to main content

LLNL NIF being slashed!

Image
By scooby
This could be the beginning of the end for ICF. 

http://www.independentnews.com/news/lab-s-nif-slated-for-budget-cut/article_1e8b0b14-71b7-11e9-a0a0-ab1184287671.html?mode=jqm

Comments

Anonymous said…
That is what happens when buffoons are in charge. This anti-science regime, if not stopped, will gradually eliminate non war-related research, as we know it!
5/13/2019 2:05 PM
Anonymous said…
If a 14% or so budget cut occurs, how many NIF Career Indefinite FTEs will be put on the EIT/EBA conveyor belt to individual RIFs or demotions, while supplemental labor employees with comparable SKAs retain their jobs? Watch it happen.
5/13/2019 2:58 PM
Anonymous said…
As it should. How long can the country tolerate massive costs with minimal meaningful returns?
5/13/2019 5:30 PM
Anonymous said…
This anti-science regime, if not stopped, will gradually eliminate non war-related research, as we know it!

5/13/2019 2:05 PM

What is "non war-related research"? You mean like the Curies and Bequerel in the late 1800's? Or maybe early radar research in the 1930's? All research "could" result in discoveries that "could" be used in war. Your comment indicates an ignorance of scientific history and of the process of scientific discovery. Your breathless tone indicates a crazy liberal mindset.
5/13/2019 5:40 PM
Anonymous said…
They could do another “NIF tax” on all other programs, including WFO, to make up the deficit. I think Moses did that years ago.
5/13/2019 7:03 PM
Anonymous said…

Looks like the DOE supports the direction of the current management. 91% fee paid.

https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/01/f58/FY18%20LFO%20EOY%20PER%20and%20FDO%20Memo.pdf
5/13/2019 11:17 PM
Anonymous said…
One problem is that ignition is a tough nut. The optics doesn’t look too good because of past decisions on how the project was to be managed. For what it is, NIF was probably the best they could do with what they had, but those early optics decisions didn’t do you any favors. The other problem is that LLNL couldn’t sell water to people dying of thirst. This has always been a problem.
5/14/2019 12:36 PM
Anonymous said…
5/14/2019 12:36 PM is a funny guy.
5/14/2019 6:19 PM
Anonymous said…
NIF was oversold and now is overfunded. NNSA has some big infrastructure bills and continues down a screwed up path for making pits in the abandoned MOX facility. They continue to fund that boondoggle at the expense of actually making pits at LANL, which appear to be underfunded by $60 million in the coming year. I hope that New Mexico finally realizes that this NNSA plan for two facilities is not in their best interest. Perhaps it’s time to play hardball over WIPP.
5/15/2019 7:18 PM
Anonymous said…
No one in the lab contractor community will ever play "hardball" with DOE/NNSA.
5/19/2019 5:54 PM
Anonymous said…
5:54pm what does hardball look like? The NNSA is the customer.
5/20/2019 8:59 PM
Anonymous said…
Hardball with the NNSA, why bother? Just fulfill compliance directives, sustain without too much deterioration and collect their fee. LLNL denizens have always had an overinflated view of themselves, but since 2007, things have gotten a bit different.
5/21/2019 11:51 AM
Anonymous said…
5:54pm what does hardball look like? The NNSA is the customer.

5/20/2019 8:59 PM

Hardball looks like pushing back on stupid requirements and contesting fee deductions. NNSA is a "customer" in one sense, but is also the "overseer" that establishes all the rules for "commerce." Not a traditional "customer" at all.
5/21/2019 6:12 PM
Anonymous said…
Hardball is the Sovereign State of New Mexico telling DOE to take their plutonium and fuel rod excess elsewhere. Like Nevada, for example.
5/24/2019 2:47 PM
Anonymous said…
There is no downside for NM to accept WIPP shipments. No one in NM is worried that monsters might happen. Except the ones who know nothing about science, in Santa Fe.
5/25/2019 7:03 PM
Anonymous said…
This type of hardball, after the loss of uncle Pete, is what led to LANS.
5/25/2019 7:47 PM
Anonymous said…
You are confused. Uncle Pete led to LANS.
5/26/2019 8:41 PM
Anonymous said…
" Except the ones who know nothing about science, in Santa Fe.

5/25/2019 7:03 PM"

Ah yes, Santa Fe, home of the Santa Fe Institute, co-founded by George Cowan, Murray Gell-Man,David Pines, etal., pushing complex science far beyond the intellectual boundaries of the typical blog rat.
5/27/2019 7:31 AM
Anonymous said…
So what? Also home of he most rabid anti-nuclear groups and people in NM, with the well-earned name of "the San Francisco of the southwest." Homeless hippies and ageing trust-fund hippie darlings. Just a wonderful place. The Santa Fe Institute is rather long in the tooth, and not very productive, unless you count sitting on laurels.
5/27/2019 5:34 PM
Anonymous said…
5/27/2019 5:34 PM blathered forth:

"The Santa Fe Institute is rather long in the tooth, and not very productive, unless you count sitting on laurels."

They have the laurels, but you don't.



6/02/2019 12:46 PM
Anonymous said…
5/27/2019 5:34 PM is obviously a Los Alamos denizen who needs to get out more. There are a lot of real cultural experiences beyond the city limits of that backwater company town, which is now known as the "new Rocky Flats." A trip off the hill once in a while might broaden horizons and enrich intellect. Assuming, of course, that there is a little grey matter up there to work with.
6/02/2019 1:14 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

By scooby
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...
155 comments
Read more

Trump is to gut the labs.

By scooby
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.
124 comments
Read more

tcp1 looking good

By scooby
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...
105 comments
Read more