To the future!

And beyond!

Feb. 2 (Bloomberg) -- In the basement lab of Nitash Balsara, at the University of California, Berkeley, are the ingredients of a lighter, more-potent battery to power the cars of the future. To build it, he needs President Barack Obama’s stimulus package to pass.

Balsara, a chemical engineer, has assembled a team of 15 scientists that applied for $25 million over five years from the U.S. Department of Energy to improve batteries by modifying their materials. Money for energy projects is part of an $819 billion stimulus, passed by the U.S. House of Representatives, that Obama says is critical to saving the economy.

Researchers at U.S. universities, led by Berkeley, Stanford University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, are targeting the $2 billion in energy research funds contained in the House recovery bill. The research dollars will produce jobs, reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil and stem the production of greenhouse gases, according to the Association of American Universities, a group of 62 schools that conduct research.

“We see it as a huge opportunity, and there is huge interest on our campuses,” said Tobin Smith, a lobbyist for the Washington-based association. “I’m very optimistic. You have an administration coming in that says it’s important.”

Obama’s New Energy for America Plan, as explained on the White House Web site, calls for creating five million jobs by spending $150 billion, over 10 years, “to catalyze private efforts to build a clean energy future.”

So now even we are ignoring the IAEA?

And this shows the rest of the world that we are serious about containing bomb making plutonium? What does this action tell Iran? Who the hell thought this action up? WTF??:

WASHINGTON (August 1, 2007)—The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) today condemned the Department of Energy for proceeding with construction of a $5 billion South Carolina plant designed to turn plutonium into mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel for U.S. nuclear reactors without honoring its commitment to make the plant available for inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Edwin Lyman, senior staff scientist in UCS's Global Security Program, said this move undermines the credibility of nuclear non-proliferation efforts at a time when the international community is struggling to stop the spread of nuclear weapons materials and technologies around the world.

In a letter sent to Energy Secretary Samuel L. Bodman, Lyman wrote, "…the U.S. has a responsibility to set the gold standard for safeguards and security as an example for Russia and for the rest of the world. Yet DOE has already failed to live up to that responsibility by shutting the IAEA out of the process for developing a safeguards regime for the MOX plant prior to construction."

An IAEA review of the plant design would provide assurances to the international community that the facility will be used for peaceful purposes, Lyman said. Such a gesture would be a "powerful symbol" to the rest of the world that the United States plays by the same rules that it urges other countries to follow.

If the Energy Department had arranged to put the plant under IAEA safeguards, it would have had to provide facility design information to the IAEA at least 180 days in advance of the start of construction.

"Unless the United States leads the way in demonstrating its commitment to the highest level of safeguards and security for facilities that process bomb-usable nuclear materials, it will be a virtually impossible task to encourage other nations to adopt high standards," said Lyman. "The Energy Department's irresponsible actions today will only increase the chance that other nations will defy the IAEA and nuclear weapons materials will fall into the hands of rogue states or terrorists."

Take this washing machine

And shov...... stand in the way of progress....

California has filed a lawsuit against the US Department of Energy for failing to allow the state to make its household washing machines more water-efficient.

In 2004, California approved rules imposing water efficiency standards for household washing machines that are higher than federal standards. The proposed new standard required washing machines sold after 2007 to use no more than 8.5 gallons of water per cubic foot of washing machine capacity. And by 2010, this figure would have to be reduced by a further 30%.

Overall, the new rules were expected to save 303 billion litres of water a year by 2019, but they could only come into effect if approved by the federal Department of Energy. However, the DOE refused to grant California a waiver from less stringent federal standards in 2004.

"For a state that faces perpetual water issues, every drop counts," says Jackalyne Pfannenstiel, chair of the California Energy Commission. "Less water use in California clothes washers will eventually save enough to supply a city the size of San Diego every year."

DOE spokesperson Julie Ruggiero says California did not meet requirements for the granting of a waiver. A waiver request has to be "economically feasible and technologically justified," she says.

Too high, too fast

"We are committed to increasing efficiency on a variety of fronts, but you have to meet the law in order to change the law," says Ruggiero. "In California, if we were to raise the standard that high, that quickly, it could have a negative impact on the producer and the consumer."

The more water-efficient machines will cost about $130 more, but according to the energy commission, savings on water and energy will save the average consumer about $242. The suit, which was filed on 20 April, also claims the state would save electricity and natural gas, and cut greenhouse gas emissions.

"California has had to sue the DOE five times over the last several years to get them on board with energy efficiency. The courts have sided with California five times," says Claudia Chandler, spokesperson for the California Energy Commission. "So, we'll see them in court."

Cleaner air

The announcement of the washing machines suit comes a day after California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger threatened to sue the federal Environmental Protection Agency if it does not act soon on the state's request to impose stricter-than-federal automobile emissions standards.

California requested in 2005 to get a federal Clean Air Act waiver that would allow it to regulate auto emissions more aggressively.

Five of the 11 states that also seek stricter auto emission standards – Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Maryland, Oregon and Rhode Island – sent letters to the EPA in support of California's threat.

The EPA has now agreed to consider California's request to limit tailpipe emissions and hold a hearing on 22 May in Washington.

Gee, that's mighty big of them. Since when did they worry about the little guy not being able to afford stuff? .... OOhhhh. The PRODUCER and the consumer. That's the Bush administration I know.