In its most recent print edition, the Economist looks at what the stimulus and new increased funding at the DOE are doing to revitalize the agency and America's energy innovation capacity as a whole.
by Tyler Burton
Americans desperate for cleaner, cheaper energy are looking more than ever to science and the breakthrough technologies that will be necessary to bring down the price of clean and renewable energy to a parity with existing, dirty technologies. And, while the desire has long been in place for something to supplant the old order of carbon technologies, the actual motor of change -- that is, the money -- has been in short supply.
Since the early 1980's, this desire manifest itself in rhetoric and little else. Now change has started to come to Washington, and now that we have in place a president who clearly understands the investment centered approach, the pragmatic question to ask is not if, but how soon? With Obama's guarantee of unprecedented investments in clean energy technology development will also come the onus on the scientific community -- particularly the innovators supported by the U.S. Department of Energy which will receive the bulk of these new investments -- to deliver real, commercially applicable solutions; and while the appropriation of funds signals a windfall of support that had previously only existed in nebulous rhetoric, the actual breakthrough technologies we are so desperately hedging the future of our economy (and also the greater world) on are still only glimmers in the mind's eye of a few brave and bold scientists.
In it's most recent edition, the Economist looks at what those familiar with the DOE are saying about this huge windfall of capital. The consensus seems to be: now is the time to stand up and deliver.
"The budget for the Department of Energy (DoE) was $24.2 billion in 2008. This year Congress gave the DoE $38.7 billion in the stimulus package and another $27 billion in appropriations. ... Politicians have been making noises about energy independence and climate change for some time. Federal spending on research and development, however, has remained far below the levels of the 1970s (see chart above). Now rhetoric is finally being matched by cash. Within the DoE's budget, Congress has appropriated $7.8 billion for energy R&D, 18% more than last year, and the stimulus provided about $8 billion. On March 23rd President Barack Obama and Steven Chu, the energy secretary, explained how some of the money would be spent, with money for labs -- a new building at Oak Ridge [a key lab in the development of the Manhattan project] will house researchers for solar batteries and superconducting transmission lines -- as well as support for scientists exploring everything from carbon sequestration to hydrogen. Spending money, however, is easy. Results require hard work."
What seems entirely clear to outsiders and insiders alike is that the DOE must renovate its system of support for clean energy innovation. It must reinvent the way it does business. Energy Secretary Chu understands this:
"Mr Chu himself is working to link basic and applied science, both within the DoE's conventional channels and beyond them. The stimulus gives $400m to ARPA-E, a new programme modelled after one at the Department of Defence, to conduct speculative research. On March 23rd Mr Chu announced that $277m would go to Energy Frontier Research Centres, with teams at universities and labs working in many different fields, from photovoltaics to nuclear energy. Mark Muro of Brookings suggests that the DoE should go further, awarding grants to regional partnerships of labs, universities, states, industry and entrepreneurs."
The Brookings proposal was developed with input from the Breakthrough Institute, and as the Economist states it may be included within the details of Obama's budget, to be revealed next month. In the end, as the Economist seems to recognize, both the amount of money we invest in clean energy innovation and the way in which we invest it will be critical to overcome the world's pressing energy and climate challenges. After all, as the Economist writes, "Meeting this deadline will require not just a price on carbon and the wide adoption of existing technology, but inventions that are still just a glimmer in someone's eye."
I think the fact that Energy Secretary Chu is first and foremost a scientist and not a traditional policymaker or lobbyist will be an asset to the "reinvention" of the way the DOE approaches energy issues. It seems he may have a keen understanding as to where money should be spent to get the best scientific results -- the labs.
Posted by: NarWilliam at March 29, 2009 7:59 PM