GBN Blog

How I could be wrong

As a scenario planner I always ask myself how I could be wrong. The question usually leads to interesting scenarios. In my first post I laid out my basic thinking, but in the last week I had two conversations that suggested how I could be wrong in an important way.

In times of major technology transitions we often miss the signs of a shift in basic technology. In the early 1990s while focusing mainly on the question of fiber optics to the home, most of the phone companies missed the revolution in mobile communications. More recently it was a computer company that revolutionized the music business while the music companies themselves were in denial about the fundamental transition underway. It is just as plausible that we could miss revolutionary technology in energy. The two conversations I had were with scientist-entrepreneurs who are championing radical new energy technologies and that challenge my current view which is still largely based on a conventional view of technology.

The first was Jay Keasling a UC Berkeley professor and founder of Amyris, a biotech company. Jay and I were together at the World Economic Forum in Dubai and had dinner on the last evening with Orville Schell. Jay is one of the leaders in an emerging field called synthetic biology that is modifying microorganisms to get them to do what you want, for example to make fuel. And that is precisely what Jay and his team have done. They have produced a microorganism that lives in water, takes sugar and CO2 (from the air) and makes diesel fuel as its waste product. The company has bought sugar plantations in Brazil, is building their first large scale plant and will begin to produce commercially in 2011 at a cost of $3.50 per gallon. That price is competitive with other biofuels in Brazil and the process leads to an 80% reduction in CO2 production. Their diesel fuel is the first of the next generation biofuels and there will be more and better versions to come. The goal will be to minimize competition with food production, as current technologies tend to do. Not only is this a new fuel, but it is the beginning of a bio industrial revolution. We will learn how to make many more things the way nature does with much less energy and resource use. Synthetic biology may be the technology that enables us to make the next 4 billion people rich without destroying the planet and Jay may be the James Watt of the new bio industrial age.

The second conversation was with Doug Richardson and his team from General Fusion, at the opposite end of the energy spectrum from biofuels. GF is developing a radical new approach to fusion energy. Fusion is the physical reaction that powers the sun by fusing two atoms of hydrogen into one of helium, converting the left over mass into an enormous amount of energy. (The multiplier is the speed of light squared.) The problem is how do you make a small ferociously hot sun and put it in a bottle. There are two main approaches so far; building a very powerful magnetic bottle or blasting a tiny capsule with a lot of lasers (soon to be tested at Livermore National Lab.) But both approaches, even if they should succeed are decades away from any practical energy production. The General Fusion technology may be ready in five years.

Their approach – Magnetized Target Fusion (MTF) – relies on a container full of spinning liquid metal that holds a magnetized plasma. That container is hit with a large number of pistons at 50m/sec creating a shock wave that compresses the plasma and triggers fusion. It does this once a second and the liquid metal conveys the heat out to a normal steam cycle. GF is testing a small-scale version this spring and expects to have a full-scale demonstration version by 2015. Like other fusion technologies this approach could also remain illusive but if it proves practical it is like synthetic biology – game changing.

If over the course of the next decade either or both of these technologies prove successful in delivering clean energy at a reasonable cost then we may see a large scale shift in energy systems. If synthetic biology proves to be the most successful then the hydrocarbon era will continue as we use biologically derived fuels to power our transport and perhaps even much of our electricity. On the other hand if General Fusion delivers affordable clean electricity then electric vehicles and electric technologies more generally will be the winners. And if they both succeed then there will be an interesting competition between the two. However, in either case the time frame of change is decades. It can happen faster with synthetic biology, which can make use of the existing energy distribution infrastructure – you will still fill up at the pump. In any case, if these radical new technologies come to fruition, the mixture of energy supply will look very different from a conventional view.

21 Responses to “How I could be wrong”

  1. Victor Marks says:

    Synthetic biology:

    My concern is, what does this do for the cost of sugar? CO2 is free, but sugar is expensive.

    What does it do to the supply of sugar? Sugar is already a premium priced product compared to sugar substitutes used in food (corn syrup, aspartame amino acids, and other sweeteners.)

    Water is also a premium product. Locales in the US have done things like forbid filling of swimming pools, attempt to fine for car washing more than once a week, clothes-washing more than twice a week, and more, in addition to raising water costs to the consumer.

    What is the cost of this new development compared to the costs of buying current fuels?

    You may notice my focus is on costs: I do this because this is what motivates cost-sensitive customers. The impact is immediate, and drives immediate choices. The case where someone buys not based on cost is when he perceives another value – whether it’s the hybrid car owner buying to be green, or the performance car owner buying for the caché, luxury, and speed.

    Using the existing distribution channel is a winner. Setting up new distribution from end to end is hard and costly, and no one wants to eat that cost up front or in the cost of the fuel.

  2. I have to admit, I possibly could not concur with you in 100%, however , this is just my personal viewpoint, that certainly could be wrong.

  3. Really good report,I recently subscribed to your rss.

  4. That was a good blog post,I just subscribed to your rss feed.

  5. Nice post. I like your blog.

  6. Hi, thanks so much for these tips! My blogs usually do bring readers and responses. One

  7. Club Penguin says:

    DO you think it’s worth the price?

  8. j 41 shoes says:

    Nice work Brian you obviously put a lot of work into it. Lets hope 2010 is as fruitful for you.

  9. I discovered that to be far more useful well let me know how it turns out! I enjoy what you guys are typically up too. Such clever operate and reporting! Keep up the excellent functions guys I’ve added you guys to my blogroll. This is a excellent write-up several for sharing this informative facts.. I will go to your internet site regularly for some latest post.

  10. Do you mind if I quote a couple of your posts as long as I provide credit and sources back to your weblog? My blog site is in the exact same area of interest as yours and my visitors would certainly benefit from a lot of the information you present here. Please let me know if this ok with you. Appreciate it!

  11. Earle Streff says:

    I found a great diet program a couple of months ago, that helped me lose a load of weight. I was really skeptical at first, as they were going on about wholegrain pasta, as being rubbish for losing weight but then my mate whose a bit a fitness freak explained how bodybuilders eat pasta to put on mass. Anyways I gave it a try, and it was really good. I managed to lose 2 stone.You can get to their sales page by clicking on this link. PS Anyone else think the bird on the video is really hot :)

Leave a Reply