Rick Perry, Ex-Governor of Texas, Is Trump’s Pick as Energy Secretary

nota bene · Dec 17, 2016

Absentglare said:
No, you aren't understanding what i'm suggesting.

- He wanted to eliminate the department. Now, he is either cavalier toward the function and purpose of the department of energy (primarily nuclear energy), or he was ignorant of it and cavalier in his agenda of blindly dismantling government.
- He also couldn't articulate his position in any way. Not just that he couldn't remember the name, he didn't even know what he was talking about. That demonstrates a lack of development about the idea.

I'm not faulting him for the gaffe, i'm faulting him for his rhetorical, dishonest, ignorant, and/or partisan plan.

I hope you'll read this Texas Tribune article, which addresses Perry's qualifications as well as potential conflicts of interest. From the article:

Washington D.C.-based power utility lawyer Joseph Hall said he suspects "Perry will be well-received by the energy sector."

"He’ll need to express his goals for the National Nuclear Security Administration [a semi-autonomous agency within the DOE], but Texas is a market leader on the policy, law and economics of the oil, gas and electric power industries," Hall said in a statement. "He understands carbon policy, the oil and gas business and generation and transmission development." https://www.texastribune.org/2016/12/13/recap-rick-perrys-texas-energy-legacy/

The reaction to Rick Perry leading the Department of Energy? It?s complicated | Science | AAAS

From Forbes:

The dirty little secret known to many inside the energy industry and few outside of the industry is that less than 1/5th (18%) of the Department of Energy's nearly $30 billion/year budget is spent on programs in the "Energy" category. The other 4/5ths is spent on programs in the categories of Nuclear Security (43%), Science (18%), and Environmental Management (19%) plus a hodgepodge of "Other(2%).

However, as Texas Governor, Perry might have had the opportunity to learn something about other areas of DOE responsibility. Texas is the home of the Pantex Facility in Amarillo, an important part of the Department of Energy's nuclear weapons complex. Forbes Welcome

longview · Dec 17, 2016

JasperL said:
I KNOW I'm ignorant on the subject, it would take a minimum of hundreds of hours to get to a point where I can independently evaluate the research - maybe thousands of hours because I have no expertise in the any of the underlying sciences, and would need that before I can apply that to a specified field, or even really comprehend the literature. So what I can do is listen to experts. I'm not positive of course, but my guess is they have thought of the issues you're bringing up and resolved them long ago.

The experts do not agree on the catastrophic increase in the rate of warming,
I have shown you a link where many of the authors say the ECS is centered around 2 C.

Sure they are - "hoax" is not a very ambiguous word. And you're obviously dismissing the IPCC and its function and making a very one sided judgment about their role and the legitimacy of what they produce - not worth anything if their "reason to exist is to find something to sound an alarm about."

I am not dismissing the IPCC, simply pointing out they have a vested interest in
siding with the high side of the estimates, siding with the low side
of the estimates would mean the IPCC is not necessary, and something they are unlikely to do.

I don't know what you mean by world wide, but putting a cost on a fuel discourages its use versus others that do not carry that cost. It reduces the break even point. And I'm sure you'll recognize that alternatives don't appear out of vacuum and that incentives for their use bring wider adoption, which encourages investment and innovation, which lowers the cost, wider adoption, etc. Eventually, those things will happen without any encouragement from anywhere, but as I see it a carbon tax isn't intended as a subsidy so much as putting a price on externalities, with carbon being only one, and the bigger one being pollution from end to end with fossil fuels. So when you say, "naturally lower cost" it isn't all that meaningful a concept unless each the cost of each option bears the direct costs and the externalities. Coal is I'm sure the "lower cost" source of energy in China, because they're willing to kill a few hundred thousand Chinese a year with smog, etc. and the cost doesn't reflect those burdens on a billion and a half Chinese.

If "gobal warming" is a global problem, it needs a global solution,
The US cannot impose a world wide carbon tax, and nether can any other country.
Also no country will grant the power to tax to the UN, as it is well
known in political Science, that the power to tax is the power to destroy!

Thanks for the reply and there is nothing there to argue with.
But I think you're being a little generous with your fellow conservatives, even on this thread, by saying "no one is dismissing the experts." Our POTUS-E does....

There are people who will never agree to anything, but with AGW the vast majority
of skeptics, are skeptical of the predictions because the data simply does not
support the higher end of the predictions.

Again people will readily buy alternative energy products when,
A) it is comparable with this requirements and,
B) when it is naturally the lowest cost choice!

Mac77 · Dec 17, 2016

shrubnose said:
"No one can stop time and/or change." That includes you and the GOP.

How are you going to stop all of the minority group mothers in the USA from having babies? They're out producing the non-Hispanic White mothers right now.

I don't see any way that you'll ever do it,but keep dreaming.

:lol:

I can't stop minority mothers already here from having children but we can limit how many more minority mothers enter the country

The goal should be assimilation so that there is no reason for minorities to hate the country they live in

And slowing down immigration is the best way to accomplish that

Mac77 · Dec 17, 2016

Casper said:
Not going to happen, not one of them.

Because you dont want it to happen?

Or because you lack the imaginagion and determination of trump and simply prefer to wallow in defeat?

Casper · Dec 18, 2016

Mac77 said:
Because you dont want it to happen?

Or because you lack the imaginagion and determination of trump and simply prefer to wallow in defeat?

Nope, because it is not going to happen.

Grow Up.

azgreg · Dec 18, 2016

longview · Dec 19, 2016

azgreg said:
http://imgur.com/XXlYOq7

Academic institutions are often poorly managed, because there is a misconception that strong academic skills
translate to strong leadership skills, and that is not always or usually the case.
On Perry's side of the column, it should be added that Perry was the Chief Executive officer and Chief Legislative officer,
For the ninth largest economy in the world!

laska · Dec 22, 2016

Back to my policy ideas(many are going to hate this one), I would add to my carbon taxes the federal government investing 100 billion in Tesla to build dozens of gigafactories to greatly speed up the process of transitioning to electric, shield Tesla from any economic downturns, create a ton of very good jobs, a ton of export money, and will make a great return on investment to taxpayers. Now typically I hate the government picking sides with companies, but in this rare case I think it would be smart.

Geoist · Dec 22, 2016

Mac77 said:
Which means that with trump in the White House and common sense on our side we have a great chance to open a few people's eyes

I trust most Americans will continue to look up to scientists when it comes to science and not an anti-vaxxer. :lol:

Mac77 · Dec 22, 2016

Geoist said:
I trust most Americans will continue to look up to scientists when it comes to science and not an anti-vaxxer. :lol:

Many American do respect the biggest snake oil salesman in the scientific community and continue to buy their man-made-global-warming product

But many others don't

Geoist · Dec 22, 2016

Mac77 said:
Many American do respect the biggest snake oil salesman in the scientific community and continue to buy their man-made-global-warming product

But many others don't

Ah yes, that's right. 97% of scientists are a part of some global conspiracy to make people believe in global warming so they can be forced to ditch car for bicycles. Meanwhile, Trump, and the oil companies, are looking out for the little guy. Don't forget to NOT vaccinate your children!

You can't make this stuff up. :2razz:

Rick Perry, Ex-Governor of Texas, Is Trump’s Pick as Energy Secretary

Chicks dig the long ball