A panel of top scientists and engineers from around the globe recently released a list of the top 14 grand engineering challenges of the 21st century. It contains what the group feels needs to be done to help all people and the planet thrive.
Former U.S. Secretary of Defense William J. Perry chaired the 18-member panel, which also included Nobel laureate Mario Molina of the University of California, San Diego; J. Craig Venter, president of the J. Craig Venter Institute; and Google co-founder Larry Page. The panel made the list public February 15 at the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual meeting.
Here’s the list of engineering challenges, in no particular order (the panel did not rank them):
- Make solar energy affordable
- Manage the nitrogen cycle
- Develop carbon sequestration methods
- Provide energy from fusion
- Restore and improve urban infrastructure
- Reverse-engineer the brain
- Advance personalized learning
- Advance health informatics
- Engineer better medicines
- Engineer the tools of scientific discovery
- Enhance virtual reality
- Prevent nuclear terror
- Secure cyberspace
- Provide access to clean water
The group did not try to list every challenge, but picked the ones it felt would most improve quality of life around the world.
If you go to engineeringchallenges.org, you can vote on which one you think is most important. There’s also a nice video of some panel members explaining and describing the 14 choices.
I voted for ‘Make solar energy affordable,’ although carbon sequestration, energy from fusion and access to clean water would also be up there for me. I think the challenges of clean energy and climate change are two of largest problems facing the world, if not the biggest.
All of these challenges are important, however, and Perry feels many can be met early this century.
Which one(s) do you feel are most important — and when can we achieve them? Post your comments here!
I would say that few of the items listed are worth worrying about. Energy from fusion is an exception.
Statemesnts like: engineer the tools of scientific discovery mean absolutely nothing ans smack of committee excess. Most things, if not all, that are worth doing will be market driven. If enough folks want something bad enough to pay enough for it, it will come to pass.
Utopia doesn’t exist now and won’t in the future. Remember, value has to do with scarcity. If something is free, it has no value and will not be paid for. It will then either wither or the government in charge will spend 50 times what it would have been worth and deliver a shoddy product.
Mr. Napier said it better than me.
I’m surprised you don’t see value in the two things on the list that seem most universal: Engineer better medicines and prevent nuclear terror. New and better medicines can benefit everyone — and could save your life. So could preventing nuclear terror.
Your free marketeer and anti-government views ignore the fact that the U.S. government has funded and supported the creation of weather satellites, the Internet, the global positioning system, to name a few things. The government — really just a proxy for the collective will of all U.S. taxpayers — funds much of our basic science research, which leads to advances in medicine, national defense and Earth and space studies. These advances benefit all.
At the AAAS meetings a few weeks ago, I heard M.I.T. President Susan Hockfield speak about the urgent need for new energy research and solutions. She noted, “federal investments in research are essential, and that they deliver spectacular return-on-investment. Just as an example: over the past 30 years, NIH invested $4 per American per year on cardiac research. In the process, they cut death from strokes and heart attacks in half.” (See her speech here, http://web.mit.edu/hockfield/speeches/2008-aaas.html)
That was certainly worth doing and of great value.
Dan,
I have no use for collective anything. It is a disaster. The “collective will” mantra is simply mob rule. It neve rwids up with the proletariat in charge. They become the serfs and the dudes that run the show do so with an iron fist.
We have a Constitution and it is the law of the land. Stealing money from the producer and handing it out to those who act right runs counter to logic. It rewards failure while penalizing success.
Please read The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith. Then read THe Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx. Then sit down and think about human nature. Think about your own behavior and reactions to stimulus. Be honest and objective. I think you will see the wisdom of my words.
Thanks for the reparte’,
Ben
In my opinion, the single greatest engineering imperative is energy storage….’batteries’ that store more power, more efficiently, over more cycles with lower weight & cost. Its not glamorous, but is truly the fulcrum on which an entire new economy rests. Its not just about electric cars, but a fundamentally new way of producing and distributing power.
Affordable solar isnt really the issue….NanoSolar already is on track to bring its thin film tech to within .99/ watt. Their manufacturing capacity is limited and all of its 2008/2009 production is already sold to big energy. The real issue is distribution and whether the freemarket will be allowed to restrict distribution in order to maximize profits or will government intervene to fasttrack these products to market.
The real issue/challenge is how to get essential emerging technologies to market as quickly as possible….will require government & business working together.
Best,
Brooks