• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Time to Return ARPA-E to Its Original Mission

    Despite having a budget for only a few years, the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) is quickly becoming a microcosm of the larger problems associated with the entire Department of Energy (DOE).

    ARPA-E, a program within the DOE, is meant to fund high-risk, high-reward projects that the private sector would likely not fund because the prospects for commercialization are too risky. But in the program’s short existence, ARPA-E is already straying from its mission. As the House of Representatives continues deliberation on the 2013 energy and water spending bill, Representative Paul Broun (R–GA) is offering an amendment that would help return ARPA-E to its intended purpose by prohibiting funding for late-stage research.

    Specifically, Broun’s amendment would prohibit any applicant from receiving ARPA-E money if the expected Technology Readiness Level (TRL) is level 7 or higher. Some government agencies use TRLs to determine the stage of technological maturity, which can span from level 1 to level 9. The levels evolve from conceptualization of an idea to a proof-of-concept up through prototype demonstrations and successful mission operations.

    The ARPA-E user guide requires that an applicant submit the TRL for the current states as well as the expected state of the technology submitted. It defines TRL-7 as a “system prototype demonstration in an operational environment.”

    Broun’s amendment would go a long way in fixing one of the fundamental problems with ARPA-E: The federal government has awarded several ARPA-E grants to companies and projects that are neither high-risk nor something that private industry cannot support. These problems with ARPA-E were recently identified by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the DOE’s Inspector General, and the House Science, Space, and Technology committee staff.

    Of the 44 small and medium-size companies that received an ARPA-E award, the GAO found that 18 had previously received private-sector investment for a similar technology. The GAO found that 12 of those 18 companies planned to use ARPA-E funding to either advance or accelerate prior-funded work.

    A large part of the problem is that using taxpayer dollars creates an expectation that the research needs to transition to a market-viable technology. Therefore, it’s easier to pick technologies in later stages of commercialization, and it’s easier for a politician to take credit for a taxpayer-funded technology development and jobs created from opening up a new plant. This is the exact opposite approach needed for ARPA-E as well as the rest of DOE research.

    Technologies that lose private financing as they move closer to commercialization are likely the worst bets for taxpayer money, since professional investors have already determined them to be losers. If those technologies are promising, venture capitalists will be eager to invest in them.

    Carrying technology from the research and development stage through to commercialization should be a private endeavor. To the extent that the government supports energy research, it should be much earlier in the process.

    Congress should hold ARPA-E accountable to its mission, and more scrutiny is necessary to ensure that ARPA-E is not funding projects already receiving private funding or using technicalities to justify those grants.

    Posted in Featured [slideshow_deploy]

    One Response to Time to Return ARPA-E to Its Original Mission

    1. Bob Sommer says:

      I have been asked by a group to work with them on a Wave Energy Converter device that seems to me to be the ultimate in simplicity, low cost and low risk. However it will take us several million to get to the prototype test phase. Is ARPA-e an agency that helps new starts or just large companies with mature technologies?
      Where do we start to request help from ARPA-e. That could be in the form of engineering support or funding.
      Thank you. I shall dig into this site to see what we can do together. Peace, Bob Sommer

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.