According to workshop participants
and the DOE, these scientific areas reflect
barriers to achieving breakthroughs in
energy technologies, the cost of energy to
US consumers and the creation of green
jobs. A total of 1,800 researchers at 46
EFRC institutions are expected to work on
conquering these challenges. The EFEC
awards to these institutions, 31 of which are
leading universities and 12 are current
DOE National Laboratories, are expected to
total $2-5 million per year for each of the
next five years.
From a less theoretical perspective of
small particle control, the DOE lists six
application areas that may reflect a more
applied view of the research:
• Direct conversion of solar energy
into electricity and chemical fuels
• Nanoscale size material fabrication
and process control using
physical, chemical and biological
tools not available until recently.
• Understanding how biological
feedstocks are converted into
portable fuels
Biological systems, including catalytic
conversions, are the “proof of concept” for
what may be achieved at the nanotechnology
level.
• A new generation of radiation
tolerant materials
• New materials, at the molecular
level, can be created that are
superior in strength, weight, and
corrosion resistance able to
operate at extreme temperatures.
• Addressing fundamental
knowledge gaps in energy storage
A better understanding of physical
and chemical processes may
result in new energy storage that
can transform renewable energy supply options.
• Transforming energy utilization
and transmission Nanotechnology
properties when controlled may
transform the transmission of
electricity and current barriers to
transmission losses and costs.
• Science based geological carbon
sequestration Equilibrium
research, with membranes and
new materials may allow us to visit
on a molecular level the best way
to capture and store unwanted
carbon.
The 46 EFRC institutions include:
Arizona State University, Cal Tech,
Lawrence Berkeley Labs, Stanford,
University of California at Berkley,
University of Delaware, Nation Energy Lab,
Idaho National Lab, Purdue, University of
Notre Dame, LSU, MIT, University of Mass,
Michigan State, University of Michigan,
UNC, Princeton, Los Alamos National Lab,Columbia, Cornell, GE Global Research,
Penn State and University of South
Carolina.
Twenty of the 46 EFRC entities
are focused on renewable and carbon neutral
energy, 14 on crosscutting science, and
the remaining twelve split equally on energy
efficiency and energy storage.
According to the DOE, the program is
designed to provide opportunities to
“inspire, train, and support leading scientists
of the future”. In addition, the intention
is to support individual research project
and a multi-faceted collaboration of scientific
work from leading institutions on the
same or similar topics.
Those in the more applied end of the
energy business may be struggling to get a
grip on what the work really entails. For
example, Northwestern University lists
their objective as “To revolutionize the
design, synthesis, and control of molecules,
materials, and processes in order to dramatically
improve conversion of sunlight into
electricity and fuels.” They go on to say,
“The center will focus on the science needed
to create integrated molecular systems
for artificial photosynthesis, to control interfacial
processes critical in organic photovoltaics,
and enable three deminensional
nanostructured materials organization for
solar fuels and hybrid photovoltaics.”
It may be difficult to process all of
that, but they also discuss their planned collaboration
between Argonne National Labs,
University of Chicago, University of Illinois
and Yale. The remaining synopses are similar
to Northwestern, although they focus
on different technical areas.
Perhaps it is wise to put this basic scientific
research in perspective. The DOE
reports that the 2009 US stimulus package
involves $34 billion of funding for improving
national systems of energy production,
distribution and transmission. A seed
amount of $6 billion will be used on loan
guarantees for commercial projects with difficulty
in obtaining traditional loans.
Another $786 million was announced in
early May 2009 to be used to accelerate biofuel
research and commercialization with
$480 million for demonstration projects and
$110 million for fundamental research. In
addition, the DOE announced $467 million
in geothermal research and $117 million in
solar research endeavors. These funding
amounts can be compared to industry activities.
For example in 2008, Exxon spent
$847 million on R&D and $35 billion in
stock repurchases, Chevron $835 million on
R&D, Shell $1.266 billion on R&D and BP
spent $1.4 billion on investments and related
alternative energy research. When put
in that context, the basic research funding
levels are low.
The results of this research will take
years to determine. The programs themselves
span 5 years and it will take many
more to commercialize new technologies.
However, from industry past experience, it
is clear that the best results may be
obtained from the commercial side of the
energy business being directly and actively
involved in helping to guide the basic
research. Many examples exist that show research funds not used wisely or research
efforts with an incorrect focus. For construction
projects, progress reports are
quite normal. Frequent progress reports on
the status and progress of basic scientific
research being funded through EFRC
would be beneficial to all participants.
Industrial partners should get involved in
the next round of funding and help provide
direction, additional resources and collaboration
for advanced research projects. In
this manner, we can focus scarce resources
on the most pressing areas with the most
potential. We all eagerly await energy
breakthroughs.
|
