<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: On Prizes and Progress</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tropophilia.com/2008/07/23/on-prizes-and-progress/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tropophilia.com/2008/07/23/on-prizes-and-progress/</link>
	<description>the love of change</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 01:45:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://tropophilia.com/2008/07/23/on-prizes-and-progress/#comment-1533</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2008 21:09:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tropophilia.com/?p=393#comment-1533</guid>
		<description>To piggyback on Taylor, didn&#039;t McCain&#039;s original release also fail to acknowledge all of the current work in the battery realm? The batteries we have right now are pretty amazing ... and they&#039;d be much less expensive with economies of scale.

The partisan in me wants to think that this is another way to tell the American public that the electric car is some sort of far-away dream when they could be mass-produced by 2009 if misinformation about their abilities didn&#039;t deflate potential demand. Tesla will have a $50,000 sedan by 2010, and if rising gas prices fuel demand that price will go down. What does a prize really do aside from deny the progress we&#039;ve already made?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To piggyback on Taylor, didn&#8217;t McCain&#8217;s original release also fail to acknowledge all of the current work in the battery realm? The batteries we have right now are pretty amazing &#8230; and they&#8217;d be much less expensive with economies of scale.</p>
<p>The partisan in me wants to think that this is another way to tell the American public that the electric car is some sort of far-away dream when they could be mass-produced by 2009 if misinformation about their abilities didn&#8217;t deflate potential demand. Tesla will have a $50,000 sedan by 2010, and if rising gas prices fuel demand that price will go down. What does a prize really do aside from deny the progress we&#8217;ve already made?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Taylor</title>
		<link>http://tropophilia.com/2008/07/23/on-prizes-and-progress/#comment-1532</link>
		<dc:creator>Taylor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2008 19:53:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tropophilia.com/?p=393#comment-1532</guid>
		<description>I hear your points, but I still fall back into the &quot;whoever invents this battery is going to receive the credit, fame, and fortune they well deserve&quot; camp.  

I like that McCain&#039;s signal with this prize idea is at least &quot;I think these technologies matter,&quot; or &quot;we need next generation battery technology to move forward on clean energy for automobiles,&quot; but the difference between the space X-Prize and this idea is (and this is arguable, but I think it&#039;s true) that nobody needs to light a fire under would-be battery inventors.  I think the pace of change in aerospace technology HAD declined a bit prior to the X-Prize, and you&#039;re absolutely right that it produced a great deal of positive investment well beyond the prize amount.  Whether that&#039;s needed here is unclear.

Bottom line: I&#039;m not opposed to the battery prize per se, I&#039;m just not convinced that it&#039;s necessary and I worry that it&#039;ll be seen as the end-all, be-all.  In other words, I fear the attitude of: &quot;we can&#039;t make any progress on clean energy until somebody solves that battery problem...guess we should go drill for oil off the coast.&quot;

As an interesting corrollary, many in philanthropy are aflutter about &quot;prize philanthropy&quot; exemplified by the x-prize.  It&#039;s a cool model for change and something to watch for.  The &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.x-prize.org&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;X-Prize Foundation&lt;/a&gt;, the organization that administered the space x prize, has a few other open &quot;contests&quot;:

&quot;The $10 million X PRIZE for Genomics prize purse will be awarded to the first Team that can build a device and use it to sequence 100 human genomes within 10 days or less, with an accuracy of no more than one error in every 100,000 bases sequenced, with sequences accurately covering at least 98% of the genome, and at a recurring cost of no more than $10,000 per genome.&quot;

&quot;The Google Lunar X PRIZE is a $30 million international competition to safely land a robot on the surface of the Moon, travel 500 meters over the lunar surface, and send images and data back to the Earth.&quot;

And the still-developing Progressive Automotive X Prize: &quot;To inspire a new generation of viable, super-efficient vehicles that help break our addiction to oil and stem the effects of climate change.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hear your points, but I still fall back into the &#8220;whoever invents this battery is going to receive the credit, fame, and fortune they well deserve&#8221; camp.  </p>
<p>I like that McCain&#8217;s signal with this prize idea is at least &#8220;I think these technologies matter,&#8221; or &#8220;we need next generation battery technology to move forward on clean energy for automobiles,&#8221; but the difference between the space X-Prize and this idea is (and this is arguable, but I think it&#8217;s true) that nobody needs to light a fire under would-be battery inventors.  I think the pace of change in aerospace technology HAD declined a bit prior to the X-Prize, and you&#8217;re absolutely right that it produced a great deal of positive investment well beyond the prize amount.  Whether that&#8217;s needed here is unclear.</p>
<p>Bottom line: I&#8217;m not opposed to the battery prize per se, I&#8217;m just not convinced that it&#8217;s necessary and I worry that it&#8217;ll be seen as the end-all, be-all.  In other words, I fear the attitude of: &#8220;we can&#8217;t make any progress on clean energy until somebody solves that battery problem&#8230;guess we should go drill for oil off the coast.&#8221;</p>
<p>As an interesting corrollary, many in philanthropy are aflutter about &#8220;prize philanthropy&#8221; exemplified by the x-prize.  It&#8217;s a cool model for change and something to watch for.  The <a href="http://www.x-prize.org" rel="nofollow">X-Prize Foundation</a>, the organization that administered the space x prize, has a few other open &#8220;contests&#8221;:</p>
<p>&#8220;The $10 million X PRIZE for Genomics prize purse will be awarded to the first Team that can build a device and use it to sequence 100 human genomes within 10 days or less, with an accuracy of no more than one error in every 100,000 bases sequenced, with sequences accurately covering at least 98% of the genome, and at a recurring cost of no more than $10,000 per genome.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;The Google Lunar X PRIZE is a $30 million international competition to safely land a robot on the surface of the Moon, travel 500 meters over the lunar surface, and send images and data back to the Earth.&#8221;</p>
<p>And the still-developing Progressive Automotive X Prize: &#8220;To inspire a new generation of viable, super-efficient vehicles that help break our addiction to oil and stem the effects of climate change.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
