Reuters reporter Timothy Appell spotlights a new study by researchers from MIT and the Brookings Institution that finds, “a surge of factory building fueled by Biden administration investments in ‘strategic sectors’ such as clean energy and semiconductors has so far flowed disproportionately to U.S. counties with relatively distressed economies and notably has not tracked ‘Democratic geography.’”
Prof. Ernest Moniz and his colleagues have designed a new consortium that plans to create an organized market for hydrogen, reports Llewellyn King for Forbes. This will allow hydrogen to become “a viable option in the pursuit of net-zero emissions,” writes King.
New York Times reporter Ana Swanson spotlights a working paper co-authored by Prof. David Autor which suggests “the sweeping tariffs that former President Donald J. Trump imposed on China and other American trading partners were simultaneously a political success and an economic failure.” Autor and his colleagues found that “the aggregate effect on U.S. jobs of the three measures — the original tariffs, retaliatory tariffs and subsidies granted to farmers — were ‘at best a wash, and it may have been mildly negative.’”
A more than $40 million investment to add advanced nano-fabrication equipment and capabilities to MIT.nano will significantly expand the center’s nanofabrication capabilities, reports Jon Chesto for The Boston Globe. The new equipment, which will also be available to scientists outside MIT, will allow “startups and students access to wafer-making equipment used by larger companies. These tools will allow its researchers to make prototypes of an array of microelectronic devices.”
Prof. Emeritus Henry Jacoby writes for The Hill about the potential impact of the 2024 presidential election on climate change. “Laissez-faire, ‘do nothing’ climate policy is a recipe for present and future climate and societal harm,” Jacoby writes. “The climate system will not magically self-repair if we continue to pump greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.”
New York Times opinion writer Peter Coy spotlights the MIT Shaping the Future of Work Initiative, a new effort aimed at analyzing the forces that are eroding job quality for non-college workers and identifying ways to move the economy onto a more equitable trajectory. Nothing is “inexorable,” said Prof. Daron Acemoglu during the project’s kickoff event. “The answer in most cases is, AI will do whatever we choose it to do.”
Writing for The Boston Globe, Prof. Gang Chen emphasizes the harm caused by the “China Initiative.” Chen notes that “some initiatives by the government, such as the China Initiative and the National Institutes of Health’s investigation into academics’ collaborations with China, weaken rather than strengthen US national security. American scientific prowess has been built on the United States’ ability to attract the best and the brightest minds from around the world.” He adds that the China Initiative has been deterring scientists from pursuing their research and careers in the United States.”
MIT irradiation facilities engineer Andriy Tuz and Prof. Jacopo Buongiorno speak with Jennifer Hiller of the Wall Street Journal about Tuz’s path from Ukraine to MIT. Tuz joined the Institute “through the U.S. government’s Uniting for Ukraine program, which provides a way for Ukrainian citizens displaced by the war to stay temporarily in the U.S.,” writes Hiller.
Prof. Jessika Trancik writes for Newsweek about the importance of government policy in supporting the transition to electric vehicles. “Policy is needed to make EVs widely accessible to people while the technology and markets continue to mature,” writes Trancik, “and to ensure the process moves quickly enough to help slow the build-up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.”
Writing for Wired, Institute Prof. Daron Acemoglu predicts that expectations for generative AI will need to recalibrated during the year ahead. Acemoglu notes that he believes in 2024, “generative AI will have been adopted by many companies, but it will prove to be just ‘so-so automation’ of the type that displaces workers but fails to deliver huge productivity improvements.”
Prof. Florian Berg speaks with Fortune reporter Paolo Confino about the future of ESG initiatives. “The problem is that companies and also investors are often not really honest about their intentions,” Berg says. “They might actually sell something that’s purely a profit-driven decision and then write it in a report as they’re doing a lot for society even though they’re just engaging in profit maximization.”
Prof. Jonathan Gruber speaks with Boston Public Radio hosts Jim Braude and Margery Eagan to explain the US deficit and its impact on the economy. Gruber says “there are four options to lowering the deficit. The first is to get inflation under control. Second is to ensure a stable and responsible government. Third, is to decrease spending. And the fourth option is to raise taxes.”
Prof. Iván Werning speaks with NPR Planet Money hosts Amanda Aronczyk and Erika Beras about the dollarization of Argentina – an effort being made to address issues within their economy. “One of the big problems of dollarizing is you basically lose the capacity to influence the economy,” says Werning. “So we all hear about the fed in the U.S. lowering rates or raising rates to try and control to minimize recessions. When you dollarize, you give that capacity up.”
Michael Mehling, deputy director of the Center for Energy and Environment Policy Research, speaks with E&E News reporter Benjamin Storrow about the impact of global climate deals on climate change. “The history of the Paris Agreement suggests that global climate deals do make a dent in emissions,” Mehling says. “But the impact can be subtle and felt over time.”
Brian Deese, an MIT Innovation Fellow, speaks with CNBC host Andrew Ross Sorkin about the state of the U.S. economy. “Perceptions of the economy have gotten increasingly polarized along political lines, and so when you look at that polling around sentiment and the economy one of the things it reflects is that increasing polarization that we are seeing everywhere and reflected in that data,” says Deese. “But number two, we do know historically that as economic data improves it leads to improved sentiment and in general, the incumbents benefit from that.”