News from
PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
Office of Communications
Stanhope Hall
Princeton, New Jersey 08544-5264
Telephone 609-258-3601; Fax 609-258-1301Contact: Steven Schultz (609) 258-5729
sschultz@princeton.eduDate: Thursday, July 29, 1999
Study Shows Energy Research Spending is in Dangerous Decline
With Innovation at 20-Year Low, Risks to Environment Could be Serious
PRINCETON, N.J. -- The United States and many other industrialized nations have dramatically reduced their research into energy technology, jeopardizing the world's ability to cope with environmental problems and the growing demand for energy, according to research done at Princeton.
Over the past 20 years, while dollars invested in other types of research have soared, money spent on improving the use of energy resources has dropped to 20-year lows, the researchers reported in the July 30 issue of Science. The number of patents being issued -- a key indicator of innovation in a particular field -- has undergone a corresponding decline for energy-related technologies.
Robert Margolis, a Ph.D. candidate, and Daniel Kammen, who was an assistant professor at the time the research was done, warn that the cutbacks in energy research and development (R&D) funding "should sound an alarm: The wholesale dismantling of large portions of the industrial world's energy R&D infrastructure could seriously impair our ability to envision and develop new technologies to meet emerging challenges."
Among the 10 nations that conduct a significant amount of energy R&D, spending in that field has declined 39 percent since 1980, Margolis and Kammen found. While some countries stepped up their funding of some programs, most made targeted or across-the-board cuts. In the United States, there was a "boom-bust cycle." U.S. energy R&D investments rose from $7.6 billion in 1976 to a high of $11.9 billion three years later. Then the investment started a long decline to a low of $4.3 billion in 1996, the last year for which figures were available. (All figures use constant 1996 dollars.)
These cutbacks come at a particularly unfortunate time, Margolis and Kammen argue, because there is increasing evidence that the environmental costs of relying on old technologies -- particularly the burning of coal -- are unacceptably high. New energy technologies are needed to address the threats of pollution and global climate change, the authors contend. Even the modest reduction of carbon emissions spelled out in the recent Kyoto accord requires more aggressive measures than are currently available.
"My personal view is that if we don't increase the funds for energy technology R&D, then we will be heading down a dark path," Margolis said. "The threats are serious."
Margolis and Kammen gauged the extent of the problem in two ways. First, they looked at how many new patents are being issued. Generating patents is an important trait for industries that want to expand their productivity and create new opportunities. In general, the number of new patents in the U.S. is up. Counting all industries, such as medicine, industrial chemicals and transportation, R&D spending rose from $100 billion to $200 billion between 1976 and 1996. The number of patents closely tracked that increase, going from 70,000 to 110,000 annually over the same period.
In the energy sector, R&D spending numbers of new patents were also closely linked. Patents rose from 102 in 1976 to a high of 228 in 1981, then declined to a low of 54 in 1994.
"The trend is clearly going in the wrong direction and there appears to be a strong connection between the inputs and the payoffs," Margolis said.
As a second measure, the researchers compared the degree to which various industries reinvest their revenues in R&D. For energy companies, that figure is about 0.5 percent. That is, one half cent of every dollar in sales goes toward new products and technology. The drug and medical industry, by contrast, plows more than 10 percent of its sales into R&D. Indeed almost all other sectors have at least a 10-fold greater rate of R&D investment.
Margolis and Kammen point out that this lack of spending is particularly troubling because it takes many years for R&D investment to pay off. So, they conclude, "… the energy sector's extremely low R&D intensity is a cause for concern not only today, but for decades to come."
Margolis and Kammen's research was conducted through the Science, Technology and Environmental Policy Program at Princeton's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. Daniel Kammen is now at the Energy and Resources Group of the University of California, Berkeley. Margolis is completing a Ph.D. at the Woodrow Wilson School and has accepted a research fellowship position at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government.
Editor's Note:
Princeton University is one of the principal research centers in the world for one potential alternative energy source: nuclear fusion. Scientists at Princeton's Plasma Physics Laboratory are starting tests on a new generation of fusion generators. Margolis and Kammen are not affiliated with the Plasma Physics Laboratory and their study did not specifically address fusion research. Princeton also conducts research into alternative energy sources through its Center for Energy and Environmental Studies.