The Little Energy Program That Could?

The innovative research and development program known as ARPA-e is in imminent danger of losing funding--and putting the U.S. even further behind in its bid for a clean-energy economy. David Biello reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Batteries to store megawatts of power. Strong magnets that don't rely on rare earths. Turning CO2 into fuel. If you hear about some "game-changing" energy research in the U.S., chances are ARPA-e is behind it.

The Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy, or ARPA-e, is intended to invest in high risk, high reward energy research that probably wouldn't be done otherwise.

As it stands the U.S. government spends roughly $4 billion a year on energy research and development. And ARPA-e's budget is just $388 million, despite the broad popularity of such a program. A proposal released this week by the conservative American Enterprise Institute and the liberal Brookings Institution would increase ARPA-e style energy research funding to at least $15 billion a year in a bid to combat climate change and improve energy security.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Instead of that happening, however, ARPA-e is in danger of losing its funding entirely. That means no more money for better ways to capture CO2 and store it or energy efficiency. Which is good news only if you like this summer's oil spill, mountaintop removal mining, catastrophic climate change and the ongoing transfer of wealth from the U.S. to oil-producing countries.

—David Biello

 

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe