Tag Archives: research and development

Breakthrough Energy Catalyst

Leave a reply

Bill Gates has an idea for how to accelerate research, innovation, and adoption of new technologies.

Through BE Catalyst, the airline will be able to invest in a large refinery that produces a high volume of sustainable fuel. As the refinery gets going, the airline can start buying fuel there. Even better, once the plant’s design is proven to work, the cost of building subsequent plants will drop. With more refineries in operation, the volume of available fuel will go up and the price will come down, which will make it more attractive to buyers, which will draw more innovative companies into the market. The virtuous cycle will accelerate.

Gates Notes

So if I understand correctly, once you have a promising technology, this is a way to try to accelerate the learning curve. Often promising technologies don’t catch on because the initial unit cost is to be commercially viable. Bringing the technology to market at scale will drive down the price both because the up front investment is spread over a large number of units, and because manufacturers and users will learn by doing and the technology will improve. But there is a chicken and egg problem where somebody has to stick their neck out and make that up-front investment to get the process started, then be patient while it plays out possibly over many decades, and be willing to take at least some risk that it may not work out. So the idea behind this non-profit group seems to be to share enough of that risk so commercial entities are willing to invest.

Four specific technologies are mentioned for this process: long-duration energy storage, sustainable aviation fuels, direct air capture (of greenhouse gases), and green hydrogen.

This sounds good to me. Maybe a model like this could work in the architecture, engineering, and construction industry, where technological progress is painfully slow and the payoff of technology is likely to be over multiple decades at least.

ARPA-H

Leave a reply

ARPA-H is an idea for a new U.S. agency (probably within the existing National Institutes of Health) focused on leading edge medical and biotech research. It seems like a bit of a gimmick to me, but if this is what it takes to fund research and development (as opposed to just funding more research and development) I am all for it. The U.S. should have a competitive advantage here, and this should benefit out citizens.

March 2021 in Review

Leave a reply

Most frightening and/or depressing story: In the U.S. upper Midwest (I don’t know if this region is better or worse than the country as a whole, or why they picked it), electric blackouts average 92 minutes per year, versus 4 minutes per year in Japan.

Most hopeful story: I officially released my infrastructure plan for America, a few weeks before Joe Biden released his. None of the Sunday morning talk shows has called me to discuss so far. Unfortunately, I do not have the resources of the U.S. Treasury or Federal Reserve available to me. Of course, neither does he unless he can convince Congress to go along with at least some portion of his plans. Looking at his proposal, I think he is proposing to direct the fire hoses at the right fires (children, education, research, water, the electric grid and electric vehicles, maintenance of highways and roads, housing, and ecosystems. There is still no real planning involved, because planning needs to be done in between crises and it never is. Still, I think it is a good proposal that will pay off economically while helping real people, and I hope a substantial portion of it survives.

Most interesting story, that was not particularly frightening or hopeful, or perhaps was a mixture of both: One study says 1-2 days per week is a sweet spot for working from home in terms of a positive economic contribution at the national scale. I think it is about right psychologically for many people too. However, this was a very theoretical simulation, and other studies attempting to measure this at the individual or firm scale have come up with a 20-50% loss in productivity. I think the jury is still out on this one, but I know from personal experience that people need to interact and communicate regularly for teams to be productive, and some people require more supervision than others, and I don’t think technology is a perfect substitute for doing these things in person so far.

sperm counts and clean chemistry

Leave a reply

Yes, according to one study from 2017, sperm counts are crashing and if you just extrapolate out in time it leads to disaster for the human race. Now, I had heard that sperm counts have dropped steadily over the decades, and we still have plenty of sperm for now, but we don’t know where the trend is headed next. I know about the concerns with endocrine disrupters. We also know that fertility is down for a variety of reasons, beginning with women around the world having more choices in terms of education and career.

This comprehensive meta-regression analysis reports a significant decline in sperm counts (as measured by SC and TSC) between 1973 and 2011, driven by a 50-60% decline among men unselected by fertility from North America, Europe, Australia and New Zealand. Because of the significant public health implications of these results, research on the causes of this continuing decline is urgently needed.

Temporal trends in sperm count: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis

I assume we are probably headed for a world of more technologically-assisted reproduction for a variety of reasons, beginning with just wanting to have more control over our fertility at various stages of our lives. But endocrine disrupters are potentially bad news for humans and for ecosystems. We don’t really try very hard to look for safer and equally functional chemicals before we put lots of them in the environment and in our bodies. I believe better living through chemistry does make our lives better on balance. For example, get rid of food preservatives or water disinfectants and we would instantly cause massive amounts of suffering and death. But get rid of most of the weird stuff in my shampoo, and I would still be able to wash my hair just fine. Building materials are a tough one. The tar on my roof and siding on my house are highly functional and beneficial, but they both cause pollution in production, manufacturing, and most likely cause water and air pollution. We can say similar things for materials used to build our streets and highways. We should look for clean but equally functional substitutes for all of these. And in the meantime, we should probably impose taxes to offset the impact these materials cause. This could both fund research into alternatives and provide some incentive to adopt alternatives as they become available.

experimental quad-copter at Boeing

Leave a reply

Boeing has an experimental quad-copter that can lift 500 pounds. The way they describe it, this could fill a niche between shipping of huge containers and delivery of tiny parcels to your door.

This kind of vehicle may not fit into your drone delivery fantasy, but it has practicality on its side. “This starts to sound like the kind of thing that can do things in real life,” says Drew McElroy, CEO of Transfix, a trucking brokerage firm. As home deliveries have grown in popularity over the past 15 years or so, he says, shipments have gotten smaller, and more targeted. The old model—trucks haul supplies to Walmart, people drive to Walmart and bring home their shopping—is evaporating. Any vehicle that can fill in the gaps between the huge bulk shipments that move by sea and the shoebox-sized packages that come to our doors can play a role.

The other interesting thing about the article is a brief description of the R&D unit that developed this thing.

In fact, Boeing isn’t quite sure where it’s going. “It’s a concurrent exploration of a nascent market and nascent technology,” says Pete Kunz, the chief technologist for HorizonX, the Boeing skunk works-venture capital arm hybrid division ///something like that/// that built this thing (the marketing team hasn’t given it a catchy moniker yet)…

Exactly what it will carry and where it will take it remains an open question. Boeing doesn’t have any concrete plans or timelines for commercialization yet, but Logan Jones, HorizonX’s senior director, says it could tote supplies to offshore oil rigs, or any other “dull, dirty, and dangerous” work now done by helicopters, which require expensive human pilots. It could take pallets from a port to a distribution center, or from a distribution center to a store. “This won’t show up at your door,” Jones says. (This is a commercial project, but it’s easy to see potential military applications, like moving supplies around combat areas.)