ARPA-E's New Director Explains How Agency is Evolving

Well Garthh, If they hired CR4 to review proposed projects, we'd have some fun aye?

It is odd that companies and corporations are reported as so resistant to developing new and transformational technologies. I wonder if it is emblematic of a profound shift from a desire for long term strength in the marketplace for such companies, towards the short term.

One of my heroes is Nevil Shute who was very conservative and a strong believer in private enterprise as capable of greater success than government. His detailing of the competition between private industry and the government for Dirigible construction, and what happened to the R100, as opposed to the R101 would imply government is not so great at the job.

In either case of either private industry or a government agency I feel the determining factor is the mission. A company with a clear mission that all within it understand is likely to do well. A Governmental Department with a clear mission may also succeed as if it was the same as a company.

The history of the US Postal Service is one I would set the great historian Paul Fussell on for lessons if I had such power in a publishing company, making books.

Sometimes great institutions are chipped away at by politicians over time so as to cripple them, same as some companies are crippled from within when looters get control.

The NACA which preceded NASA did significant work in research that aided the US Aviation industry. Wing designs and engine cowlings of US aircraft, and eventually others benefited greatly.

What does get to you sometimes is that you can often figure that stuff you are forced to pay for with your taxes will do you personally no good at all.

Sure enough I expect somebody will benefit from ARPA-E, but am inclined to suspect that whatever profit made from the research that is done will be squandered on the free riders justified as part of the mission of accepting the risky investments as part of the mission of the agency.

Would maybe restrain them a bit if part of the mission of the new agency was to give those taxpayers who pay for this risky research a check, instead of essentially pledging to give it away to the people who ought to actually pay for it.

So far DARPA hasn't sent me a check for my investment by proxy in them, for instance.

Clarity of mission

good point

I would advocate a skewing of the tax code to encourage speculative R/D, though I'm not completely clear on how to quantify speculative?

Have a look at what is going on in the area of Ocean Energy. Not a big industry as yet, but also not receiving anywhere near the government funding of such schemes as solar or wind energy, or sequestering carbon- yet with what some would claim a greater possibility of getting more for less environmental impact...