In an article for Bloomberg News, Noah Smith highlights a study by MIT researchers that examines the factors influencing the decline in solar prices. The researchers found that, “from 1980 to 2001, government-funded research and development was the main factor in bringing down costs, but from 2001 to 2012, the biggest factor was economies of scale,” Smith explains.
Writing for The New York Times, Prof. Barry Posen argues for reevaluating America’s role in NATO. “President Trump has no strategy for returning the European allies to full responsibility for their own futures,” writes Posen, “the American foreign policy establishment could better spend its time devising such a strategy than defending the counterproductive trans-Atlantic status quo.”
Axios reporter Steve Levine writes that a new paper by Prof. David Autor shows how, “cities, once the hope of people seeking a middle-class life, are now a symbol of the disappearance of well-paid, middle-skill work.”
New York Times reporter Dennis Overbye writes about the years of effort that go into ensuring that large-scale, Nobel-prize winning scientific endeavors like LIGO – which is jointly operated by MIT and Caltech – are funded and successful. Overbye writes that LIGO’s success “was a saga of persistence, ingenuity and just plain bravery in the face of nature and professional skepticism.”
In an article for Fast Company about hackathons, Dan Formosa highlights how the Make the Breast Pump Not Suck Hackathon held at MIT was an inclusive event focused on addressing issues of bias, inequality and accessibility, noting how the organizers “went to extremes to assure diversity.”
New Yorker contributor Caroline Lester writes about the Moral Machine, an online platform developed by MIT researchers to crowdsource public opinion on the ethical issues posed by autonomous vehicles.
John Reilly, co-director of the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, writes for Fortune about the key components needed to create a Green New Deal. “A steady and slow buildup of spending would allow more time to select and evaluate green infrastructure options that have a reasonable chance of working,” writes Reilly. “We need the right size of government spending for the long term.”
New York Times reporter Steve Lohr writes about the MIT AI Policy Conference, which examined how society, industry and governments should manage the policy questions surrounding the evolution of AI technologies. “If you want people to trust this stuff, government has to play a role,” says CSAIL principal research scientist Daniel Weitzner.
An excerpt published in National Geographic from a book by Deborah Blum, director of the Knight Science Journalism Program at MIT, examines how Henry Heinz’s push to improve the quality of his company’s ketchup helped usher in new food safety regulations. Blum writes that Heinz realized “consumer distrust of the food supply would be far more expensive to manufacturers like him than the cost of improving the food itself.”
Prof. Emeritus and Nobel laureate Peter Diamond speaks with Meghna Chakrabarti of On Point about U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s proposal to increase the top marginal tax rate to 70 percent. “That will raise a lot of money that we could [use to] address some of our shortfalls and that will help us prepare for the large costs coming from climate change,” says Diamond of the proposal.
In an article for The Boston Globe, Prof. Jonathan Gruber argues that a recent ruling by a federal judge in Texas that the Affordable Care Acts is unconstitutional puts the health of people around the country at risk and threatens our democracy. “If the courts overturn this outcome, it is an attack on the very process of representative government in the US,” writes Gruber.
Prof. Thomas Levenson writes for The Boston Globe about the harm posed by casting doubt on the threat posed by climate change. “It falls both to the scientists at work in areas that have fallen prey to controversy — and the news media that covers both science and politics,” argues Levenson, “to make it clear what is truly known, and why it matters.”
A new study by researchers from MIT and a number of other universities finds that the “Trump administration’s proposal to roll back fuel economy standards relies on an error-ridden and misleading analysis that overestimates the costs and understates the benefits of tighter regulation,” reports Tony Barboza for The Los Angeles Times.
New York Times reporter Brad Plumer writes that a study by MIT researchers examines what forces contributed to the declining cost of solar panels. “We can cut emissions more quickly if we’re strategic about how we design energy policies and invest in R&D,” explains Prof. Jessika Trancik. “And one way to do that is to learn from past successes and figure out exactly why they happened.”
Writing for Ars Technica, Megan Geuss examines a new MIT study that finds, “government and private R&D spending contributed the most to cost-per-watt declines for solar panels since 1980. This spending spurred the low-level efficiency improvements that were important for the solar industry on a technical level.”