'Technological Optimist' Sees Role for NASA in Alternative Energy Future
04.01.08
By: Jim Hodges
Don't count Martin Hoffert among those who believe the world will end when
global warming melts enough ice to drown the planet's homes. Or even when
the carbon dioxide content of the air stifles us and our food until we
breathe our last or starve to death.
"I'm a technological optimist," Hoffert told a Colloquium assembly at the
Reid Center on Tuesday. "I believe we can know the answers to the questions
that are facing us, but even if we don't know, we are continually working
toward that answer. And the way I know it is the technical society we live
in."
Hoffert, a retired professor of physics and the former chair of the
Department of Applied Science at New York University, came to NASA Langley
in answer to a call for "green lecture" speakers, but also in search of some
of those answers.
"We have to transform our energy technology system and we have a time
constraint," Hoffert said. "By the middle of the century, we have to
transform our energy system to one that's based on something other than
fossil fuels that emit CO2 into the atmosphere, to something based on 'X,'
and we don't know what 'X' is."
Image right: Martin Hoffert says, "NASA has a pool of talented
innovators, of scientists and engineers, thinkers about technology, thinkers
about complex systems." Credit: Sean Smith.
The solutions aren't political, Hoffert said, except for the need for
enlightened politicians.
"Many of their solutions are superficial, and they mainly represent sort of
an economic approach like a trade policy or a carbon tax, how to pay for
it," he said. "Most of the political leaders aren't very knowledgeable about
science and engineering. Primarily their background is legal, and they know
something about economics."
The last scientifically enlightened president of the United States was Jimmy
Carter, Hoffert added. Carter was a nuclear engineer.
The answer also isn't industry.
"The truth is that you can't expect venture capitalists or even progressive
corporations … to make investments in the future beyond which they can
justify to their stockholders," Hoffert said, citing a requirement that most
such investments have to pay off in three to five years.
The answer is some sort of combination of the two, with government leading
through an energy policy and scientific and technological investment.
"That's what I hope will happen by energizing the scientists and engineers
of this country and of the world," Hoffert said.
In that, NASA can take a role in helping to "mine" space, he said. "I
believe it's time for Americans to understand that we derive benefits from
space by exploiting the environment of space."
But, he added, "the most important thing is that NASA has a pool of talented
innovators, of scientists and engineers, thinkers about technology, thinkers
about complex systems."
The problem in finding energy solutions isn't money, Hoffert said, perhaps
surprisingly.
"My opinion is that paying for it is the easy part," Hoffert said. "The hard
part is doing it."
The U.S. invests about $120 billion a year in research and development, much
of that spent on the military. Energy gets about $3 billion of that, he
said. The need is for about $30 billion a year.
Without it, and without the will to invest in alternative fuels and fuel
technology, society will exist through the end of the available petroleum,
just beyond the end of the century.
But "if we do make it, is it going to be worth being here, or are we going
to have so severely depleted a planet that it isn't worth it?" he wondered.
Hoffert said the world will survive and it will be worthwhile. A "technical
optimist" has to believe as much.
NASA Langley Research Center
Managing Editor: Jim Hodges
Executive Editor and Responsible NASA Official: H. Keith Henry
Editor and Curator: Denise Adams