My Hat Is Off To Dr. Cheryl Martin of the Advanced Research Projects Agency–Energy

craigshieldsPosted on November 5, 2013 Posted in Renewables - Science

I was honored to meet Dr. Cheryl Martin, deputy director of ARPA-E (Advanced Research Projects Agency–Energy at the CleanTechLA event yesterday.  As I pointed out when I introduced myself, she and I have at least two contacts in common:  Matt Rogers, who recently left his senior post at the Department of Energy, and Ray Lane (whom I interviewed for Is Renewable Really Doable?), Managing Partner at Kleiner Perkins, Dr. Martin’s most recent employer.

If you privately harbor the notion that government people are bumbling fools, that concept vanishes from your head within about a millisecond after Dr. Martin opens her mouth.  She’s brilliant, and ARPA-E is doing terrific work across hundreds of different disciplines associated with materials, transportation, energy generation, storage, transmission, and so forth.  The audience was enthralled with her presentation.

‹ New Business Model for Renewable Energy — A Reminder that the Real Market for Cleantech Solutions Lies in the Developing World

When It Comes To Thinking About Sustainability, Vermonters Aren’t Like the Rest of Us ›

Tagged with: ARPA-E, Cheryl Martin, Department of Energy, Ray Lane, United States Department of Energy

One comment on “My Hat Is Off To Dr. Cheryl Martin of the Advanced Research Projects Agency–Energy”

1. Glenn Doty says:

   November 6, 2013 at 12:20 pm

   “Bumbling Fools” may or may not be precisely correct, but a quick scan through the list of selected projects that ARPA-e has chosen to fund, combined with a brief consideration of what they have not chosen to fund… gives the clear impression that they don’t much care about developing market viable technology that can help with the goal of lowering the net carbon intensity of energy. Most of the projects they have in the works are either minutiae-level efficiency upgrades or hopeless fantasies that will cost far more than what could ever be market viable. While there are a few projects that may have some feasibility and some small amount of interest… I would be far more impressed if the ARPA-E list looked more like this:
   http://2greenenergy.com/investors/

   than like this:

   http://arpa-e.energy.gov/sites/default/files/documents/files/OPEN%202012%20Project%20Descriptions.pdf

   That’s not flattery, that’s fact. One list reflects an honest desire to find solutions to major issues (even though I’m highly skeptical of a few – which I will not single out on your blog)… while the other list is clearly not.