This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site you agree to our use of cookies. To find out more, see our Privacy and Cookies policy.
Skip to the content

Share this

Free weekly newswire

Sign up to receive all our latest news direct to your inbox.

Physics on film

100 Second Science Your scientific questions answered simply by specialists in less than 100 seconds.

Watch now

Bright Recruits

At all stages of your career – whether you're an undergraduate, graduate, researcher or industry professional – brightrecruits.com can help find the job for you.

Find your perfect job

Physics connect

Are you looking for a supplier? Physics Connect lists thousands of scientific companies, businesses, non-profit organizations, institutions and experts worldwide.

Start your search today

Blog

Has Steven Chu been a good US energy secretary?

By James Dacey

Photo of Steven Chu

Nobel laureate Steven Chu. (Courtesy: DOE)

The Nobel laureate Steven Chu has recently announced that he is to resign from the role of US energy secretary. He will step down from the post at the end of February having served throughout the entire four years of Barack Obama’s first presidential term. During his reign, Chu has received strong plaudits from many Democrats and environmentalists. Obama has credited Chu for increasing the nation’s use of renewable energy while reducing its dependence on oil imports.

Others, however, have been critical of Chu. He is accused of specific failures such as the initiatives that led to the downfall of Solyndra – a solar-cell manufacturer that went bankrupt after receiving $535m in Department of Energy loan guarantees. A more general criticism when Chu was appointed was that he had very little political experience to carry out such a critical role in the governance of the US.

What do you think about Chu’s term in the President’s cabinet? Let us know by taking part in this week’s Facebook poll.

Has Steven Chu been a good US energy secretary?

Yes
No

Feel free to explain your choice by leaving a comment either on this blog post or on our Facebook page.

In last week’s poll we asked you a question on the topic of science communication. We have recently relaunched our blog, so we asked “What’s the most important feature of a successful science blog?”. The majority of people – 64% – believe that the “quality of writing” is the most important factor. The second most popular choice, with 20% of the votes, was the “scientific authority of the blogger”. And the third most popular, with 10%, was “a bloggers passion for their subject(s)”.

A number of voters also posted comments, including one of our Facebook followers named Paul Warbeck. He wrote “The language must have clarity; it must be succinct; it need not be comprehensive of all the implications of every fact, but it must excite the reader’s imagination, fuel his/her speculation, and incite wonder. It must foster profound understanding.”

Thank you for all you participation and we hope to hear from you again in this week’s poll.

This entry was posted in General and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
View all posts by this author  | View this author's profile

2 comments

  1. Roto

    Mr Chu is no dummy, but perhaps not the best
    suited to be the Energy Secretary. No
    industrial experience is a definite negative.
    I’m not convinced his efforts have been
    practical on the whole. Renewables are fine
    but I think more emphasis should have been
    given to fusion and advanced fission. I
    can’t fault his efforts on renewables. That
    was going to be tough no matter what.

  2. M. Asghar

    Mr. CHu’s empahsis on the renewables was the right thing to do, because these are going to be the decentralised and everbody’s energies. As to fusion, it is still a project as it has been for the six decades and the fission reactors are being improved upon all the time, but we still we do not know as to how to treat the nuclear waste and dismantle methodically the out of business nuclear ractors.

Leave a comment

Your e-mail address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Guidelines

  • Comments should be relevant to the article and not be used to promote your own work, products or services.
  • Please keep your comments brief (we recommend a maximum of 250 words).
  • We reserve the right to remove excessively long, inappropriate or offensive entries.

Show/hide formatting guidelines

Tag Description Example Output
<a> Hyperlink <a href="http://www.google.com">google</a> google
<abbr> Abbreviation <abbr title="World Health Organisation" >WHO</abbr> WHO
<acronym> Acronym <acronym title="as soon as possible">ASAP</acronym> ASAP
<b> Bold <b>Some text</b> Some text
<blockquote> Quoted from another source <blockquote cite="http://iop.org/">IOP</blockquote>
IOP
<cite> Cite <cite>Diagram 1</cite> Diagram 1
<del> Deleted text From this line<del datetime="2012-12-17"> this text was deleted</del> From this line this text was deleted
<em> Emphasized text In this line<em> this text was emphasised</em> In this line this text was emphasised
<i> Italic <i>Some text</i> Some text
<q> Quotation WWF goal is to build a future <q cite="http://www.worldwildlife.org/who/index.html">
where people live in harmony with nature and animals</q>
WWF goal is to build a future
where people live in harmony with nature and animals
<strike> Strike text <strike>Some text</strike> Some text
<strong> Stronger emphasis of text <strong>Some text</strong> Some text
WordPress Appliance - Powered by TurnKey Linux