Credit: Technology Review
Energy
A Year of Stimulus for High Tech
Money for advanced technology is now trickling out of government coffers.
- Tuesday, December 29, 2009
- By Kevin Bullis
A big chunk of February's $787 billion federal stimulus package--about $100 billion--is devoted to discovering, developing, and deploying new technologies ("Can Technology Save the Economy?"). But spending that money takes time, and, as the year closes, much of it has only just started to trickle out into the hands of researchers and industry.
The stimulus package was designed to boost technology in several key areas. It was intended to promote the adoption of electronic medical records, which could help patients in several ways ("The Benefits of Electronic Health Records" and "Prescription: Networking"). About $20 billion has been allocated so far and, of that, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has announced $1.2 billion in grants to develop electronic records.
The Recovery Act also allocated some $7.4 billion for increasing rural broadband Internet service. Little has happened so far, although the White House did announce $182 million for 18 projects this month. The U.S. Department of Agriculture, which was given $2.5 billion for broadband, hasn't yet published targets for distributing its money. And of the nearly $5 billion for broadband allocated to the U.S. Department of Commerce, several million has been awarded for preliminary studies, such as "to collect and verify the availability, speed, and location of broadband." The White House promises that broadband grants will total $2 billion in the next 75 days.
The lion's share of stimulus funding for technology development--$60 billion--went to energy, largely in the form of grants and tax credits designed to spur renewable energy and energy efficiency. The bill was a windfall for the U.S. Department of Energy, which received $39 billion in addition to its annual budget of approximately $25 billion. The department's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), which typically gets less than $2 billion a year, won $16.8 billion, and has spent about half a billion so far. Almost all of that, $367 million, has gone to weatherization projects, which don't do much to advance technology, but could save a lot of energy. Some $2 billion was allocated for advancing battery manufacturing, which will be key to setting up an advanced battery industry in the United States. About a billion has been awarded so far, although that money has yet to be spent.
- 1
- 2
Related Articles
Fisker's Woes Put A123 Systems at Risk
Both the plug-in hybrid startup, and the company that supplies its batteries, appear to be in trouble.
The Year in Robotics
During the past 12 months, robots got better at grasping, smiling, and avoiding angry humans.
eolufemi
2 Comments
- 1242 Days Ago
- 12/26/2009
If we can produce it ourselves, I think it's wise to do so, especially considering our poor relations with China. We should be trying to cut the trade deficit, not exacerbate it.
StupidPeasant
98 Comments
- 1234 Days Ago
- 01/03/2010
We must thank our overlords for the money they give to the sciences. They could be even faster at doling out the dough, but it takes time to pick programs that can be used as political payoffs and photo opportunities. Election years are ahead. They need to save some ammunition.
If we must spend the public's money,
I would like to have seen much, much more (90+%) go into science and local energy production.
From an economic and security point of view, having abundant local energy solves everything. If people have their own power, the grid can't be disrupted. Small energy systems will be more upgradable as new technologies evolve, giving nice little jobs for the masses.
Just think, if energy cost get super low, we could do crazy fun stuff like: desalinate and clean tons of sea water and pump it all the way to Arizona or the Sahara Desert. We could feed the world. We could keep the environment clean. We could run our air conditioner all day with the doors open. We could do what-ever.
Maybe it's in the interest of somebody that expectations of the future cost of energy remain high. There are billions invested in energy efficiency upgrading, not to mention the political investments. All that would change with breakthroughs in energy production.
I would like some stimulus money, please.
smithsomian
182 Comments
- 1232 Days Ago
- 01/05/2010
remember, the PORKulus bill was never intended to advance technology or improve the economy. it was only intended to focus attention on the Federal government as the end-all and be-all of our lives, and to provide payoffs to voting districts who had "earned" it (wink, wink, nudge, nudge, know what I mean?). read 1984. the President is using the Big Brother playbook to a T.
On Twitter
Become a Fan on Facebook
Subscribe to the Feed
RD
212 Comments
Resource Shortage
Congress has failed for decades to ensure an adequate supply of domestically produced raw materials for the American economy and our high technology future.
Without our own minerals, America will remain at the mercy of other countries. Rare earth metals, critical for advanced technology is the best example. China now has a near monopoly on REE (Rare Earth Elements), and will exploit that advantage in forcing manufacturing to its domestic force. Read the NYT article www.nytimes.com/2009/09/01/business/global/01minerals.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1 for an example of what we are in for. Then go to the USGS report on REE.
Ecopoliticians have undermined our future, regardless of how much "stimulus" taxpayer money Congress doles out to its friends.
Reply
Kingofallmedia
7 Comments
Re: Resource Shortage
As for subsidizing the creation of rare earth mining operations in the USA:
1) subsidizing an increase would only further strain ties with china by undercutting their price. The cost of subsidization far outweighs the benefits.
2) Canada has rare earth. As China begins to decrease production other places will fill the gap: there just isn't an economic incentive (yet) for other places to produce.
3) It's messy: From what I've seen rare earth mining is a very dirty process owing to the fact the REE are often not in a concentrated form. Which is probably why we let China take the lead on REE mining.
So let me get this straight: you want to create massive open top mines all over the continental U.S., piss off the Chinese, and pay billions for it, despite the fact that no shortage exists?
Reply