Technology Got Us Into This Mess

Question: What's causing the bottleneck hampering advances in energy and transportation? 

Nate Lewis: So advances in energy technology, I think, is one of the prime areas that is ripe for innovation. The reason we haven’t innovated so much in energy technology is because energy was cheap. Oil in the 1980’s was $8.00 a barrel. So nobody cared, so nobody tried. Now, we’re worried about energy security, we’re all worried at one level or another about national security, we’re worried about environmental security. These things are not going to go away not matter what the price of oil is. And so, we really need to ramp up getting all sorts of smart people trying all sorts of things knowing that only one-tenth of them are going to work, but that’s exactly what we want to do. We want to let the hundred flowers bloom and then pick the few that have the kernels of the right answers that can be scaled and cheap. And this can occur in a variety of areas. It can occur in really cheap solar panels that don’t look like anything we know today. 

We shouldn’t have to have people hammer these glass slides up on your roof and make sure they don’t crack. We should have solar panels that you can go to the hardware store and buy a bucket of paint and paint on your roof, or roll out like carpet. Those things actually exist in labs like ours right now. We don’t yet have ways to make them yet so that you can go buy a bucket of them at the hardware store and put it on your roof. But we could do that if we really set our minds to it. We could really find ways to store energy from the sun so as to avoid this issue of intermittency. We could really find ways to deploy much more rapidly and more smartly nuclear power if we decided to go there. We could do all sorts of things with technology. Technology ultimately got us into this mess, and really it’s going to be policy, economics, and a big piece of technology if we’re going to get out way out of it sooner, rather than later. 

Question: What should be the responsibility of government when it comes to advancing things like solar cell development? 

Nate Lewis: Well, we really have to understand the level of investment that is needed to make a big difference in the enormous business that is the energy business. Right now, if you look at a percentage of revenue going into research and development (R&D), the electric utility industry spends less as a percentage of revenue on R&D then does the dog food industry. So, if you are putting your money where your mouth is, we are literally going to the dogs when it comes to spending on energy innovation. 

We have a $1.5 trillion or so energy industry, just in the United States. Most companies will say they have to spend at high-tech companies, 10 percent of revenue on R&D to run fast or die to invent the next generation of computer chips, to invent the next generation of iPods, or iPad, or whatever you’re favorite gizmo is, or to invent the next generation of pharmaceuticals to make antibiotics before the bugs figure it out first and become resistant.  If we spent 10% on revenue on R&D in energy, we’d be spending $150 billion every year trying to innovate our way out of the problem before it gets to us. 

Now, maybe private industry should bear the burden of two-thirds of that. That leaves about a third, maybe a fifth. But either way you look at the arithmetic, it’s something like $20 or $30 billion a year we should be putting right here, right now into clean energy innovation ideas so that we can get all these smart scientists and engineers and technical people in all the garages and in the Silicon Valleys inventing and failing as well as succeeding, and picking the ones that win so that we can deploy what we have now as well as develop these faster, better, cheaper ways to help us get through this issue in the one time chance that we have to get it done. 

Recorded on February 3, 2010

The reason we haven’t innovated enough in energy technology is because energy used to be cheap.

Billionaire warlords: Why the future is medieval

The world's next superpower might just resurrect the Middle Ages.

Videos
  • Russia? China? No. The rising world superpower is the billionaire class. Our problem, says Sean McFate, is that we're still thinking in nation states.
  • Nation states have only existed for the last 300-400 years. Before that, wealthy groups – tribes, empires, aristocracies, etc – employed mercenaries to wage private wars.
  • As wealth inequality reaches combustion point, we could land back in the status quo ante of the Middle Ages. Who will our overlords be? Any or all of the 26 ultra-rich billionaires who own as much as the world's 3.8 billion poorest. What about Fortune 500, which is more powerful than most of the states in the world? Random billionaires, multinational corporations, and the extractive industry may buy armies and wage war on their own terms.
Keep reading Show less

Golden blood: the rarest blood in the world

We explore the history of blood types and how they are classified to find out what makes the Rh-null type important to science and dangerous for those who live with it.

Abid Katib/Getty Images
Surprising Science
  • Fewer than 50 people worldwide have 'golden blood' — or Rh-null.
  • Blood is considered Rh-null if it lacks all of the 61 possible antigens in the Rh system.
  • It's also very dangerous to live with this blood type, as so few people have it.
Keep reading Show less

5 of the worst keto diet side effects

The keto diet can help with weight loss, but at what cost?

Pixabay
Surprising Science
  • In addition to weight loss, there are a few well-known side effects of the keto diet, some of which can be unpleasant.
  • Some side effects of the keto diet are bound to occur, though others only happen when the diet is implemented poorly.
  • The keto diet doesn't have to lead to a host of negative side effects, but anyone considering undertaking the diet over the long term should be especially careful.
Keep reading Show less