Use our labs to the fullest

  • Follow Letters

There are 17 national labs within the U.S. Department of Energy. There are thousands of Ph.D.s doing basic and continuing research into all aspects of energy use. The CSRA has one of the labs at the Savannah River National Laboratory at Savannah River Site. The labs can patent products and methods in the name of the United States and then sell these cheaply to American corporations. Nonstrategic products and methods can also be licensed to other nations who are members of the World Trade Organization with good track records for “fairness.” Methods are standardized, maintenance costs are minimized and duplication of research and development is minimized – a true win-win!

Imagine a breakthrough in battery or fuel cell technology at SRNL. The technology could power electric cars, including Club Car and E-Z-Go locally; store energy for water; wind and solar systems; transform emergency systems; and lower power loss during transmission – all this in addition to maintaining thousands of high-paying jobs in the CSRA. The same could be said for hydrogen technology, nuclear technology, water technology, storage technology, etc.

Imagine if more than $5 billion of the $90 billion given and loaned for alternative energy had been dedicated to SRNL and the rest to other national labs. Taxpayers already employ the workforce; facilities already exist; and the labs have proven track records. While some individual companies have failed, all companies would benefit from applicable new technologies.

NASA caught the imagination of the world when President Kennedy set a goal of placing a man on the moon by “the end of the decade.” There are products we still use, such as Tang and Velcro, that were invented under NASA contracts. This is trivial compared with 17 national labs developing products and methods that make our lives on Earth better! Let’s use them to the fullest!

Comments (8)

Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
Bizkit
6029
Points
Bizkit 11/09/12 - 07:53 am
2
0

They are all being used to

They are all being used to the fullest-just without all the funding like the Clinton years. Science is a process and often, like a fine wine, it takes time for an idea to mature. It just ain't say it so and make it so. Unfortunately the Obama administration is picking winners and losers in that regard too. A lot of technology almost ready for application were nipped in the bud. Thank your glorious leader.

SCEagle Eye
297
Points
SCEagle Eye 11/09/12 - 08:20 am
3
0

cut all government funding to SRNL?

Interesting that the above commenter seems to advocate no government funding for SRNL. Is this really the way to advance good research and beneficial programs? If the government is working it should try to fund good things without being politically driven to do so (as is unfortunately the case with the troubled MOX program) and not just walk away. What about it, Bizkit, you think that government funding should just be ended at SRNL so there is no picking of "winners and losers?" That doesn't sound like good approach to me.

soapy_725
24750
Points
soapy_725 11/09/12 - 08:44 am
1
0
soapy_725
24750
Points
soapy_725 11/09/12 - 08:47 am
2
0
Bizkit
6029
Points
Bizkit 11/09/12 - 08:54 am
2
0

Where did I advocate no

Where did I advocate no spending-gee learn to read. I was stating the fact that Clinton promoted vast spending in research which Bush and then Obama have cut so the pie of money is much more competitive. Obama is circumventing that competition and picking winners and losers-like his adminstration doesn't promote hydrogen fuel cell research-which is really close to fruition.

Humble Angela
19254
Points
Humble Angela 11/09/12 - 09:09 am
3
0

"Unfortunately the Obama

"Unfortunately the Obama administration is picking winners and losers in that regard too."

What winners?

Bizkit
6029
Points
Bizkit 11/09/12 - 10:05 am
2
0

Good question. I'll read up

Good question. I'll read up on it.

fedex227
3760
Points
fedex227 11/09/12 - 10:47 pm
1
0

Interesting letter ...

The writer advocates apportioning some of the funds allocated to the development of alternative energy sources to programs already in place that might further advance our energy independence through scientific breakthroughs. Sounds logical to me. Yet for some reason he is met with comments like “A lot of technology almost ready for application were nipped in the bud. Thank your glorious leader.” Along with other anti-Obama rants. I read nothing in the writer's letter that indicated what his political affiliation was or who he voted for. Just wondering, why all the animosity toward the writer? BTW Mr. Tatum, great idea.

fedex227
3760
Points
fedex227 11/10/12 - 12:54 am
0
0

Humble Angela?

any comment?

Humble Angela
19254
Points
Humble Angela 11/12/12 - 08:38 am
0
0

fedex....I showed no

fedex....I showed no animosity to the writer....my comment was to Bizkit.

Back to Top
Top headlines

Analysis finds bulk of club crime reports on southside

During the past five years, while sheriff's deputies were summoned to 27 downtown clubs 227 times, officers responded to 312 other incidents - including three homicides - at 26 clubs in south Augusta.
Loading...