Innovation Waypoints has two objectives: (1) provide honest, in-depth discussion of what we need to do and what we have done — right and wrong — to structure how we fund energy innovation and deployment; and (2) highlight the implementation methods and the programs that have broken the mold and have had incredible results despite bureaucratic challenges.
We hope you'll subscribe and follow along, and join us in a conversation about how to move forward and build on lessons learned. We’d particularly love to hear from you if you’re excited about any of our future topics, or if you have suggestions for things we should add.
Our Starting Themes
We are currently writing on three main themes. While you’re more than welcome to explore in any manner you like, we’ve listed our current and planned posts below in the order we’d recommend for each area. For a bit more on what we’re writing and why:
Funding Mechanisms and DOE Insights
What are the primary mechanisms that are used, and how do they translate to private funding for research through deployment? We explore how different tools have evolved and how they map to commercialization pathways.
▸Show/Hide posts
Primer and Explainer Series
Prize Series
Coming soon
- Project Intermediary Agreement Explainer: how providing an intermediary funding can bring new forms of collaboration or funding flexibility to federal program designers unleashing innovative program designs.
- Scoring in Solicitations: Every competition includes published scoring criteria, but how the scoring process actually works and who is involved at each step is often unclear from the outside. An overview of common approaches across DOE and how to best position your projects.
- The SBIR Program: A multipart series covering the history and structure of the Small Business Innovation Research program, challenges with the current model, recent changes to authorizations, and opportunities to improve alignment and value to both DOE and industry.
- DOE Offices, Missions, and Money: How appropriations, organizational structures, and mission definitions shape the way DOE runs programs, the limitations they impose on flexibility, and some of the reasons it is so difficult to fully fix the DOE commercialization pipeline.
- DOE Situational Awareness: DOE is a big organization and it can be difficult to keep track of everything going on. We share a few strategies for staying aware of solicitations, strategies, and interrelationships between offices and initiatives: what to look for, where to find it, and when to check.
- A Program Design Center for DOE: A centralized capability for designing and deploying effective funding mechanisms across DOE could address chronic fragmentation across the agency. Such a center could provide tactical expertise on structuring solicitations, deploying innovative mechanisms, and navigating approval processes, leading to better programs and faster execution.
- ARPA-E: The Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy is structured and operates in a significantly different way than much of the rest of DOE. In some cases this is a real strength, but there are limits to how widely the approach can be effectively applied.
Risk and Trust
Risk is multi‑faceted — beyond project execution, it includes how programs are scoped and portfolios built. Increasing transparency and trust improves our ability to balance risks and achieve outcomes.
▸Show/Hide posts
Coming soon
- AI and Applications: everyone is (or shortly will be) using AI to support application development. What does this mean for established review processes, relationship building, and trust?
- AI and Program Design, Execution and Evaluation: while government has been slow to incorporate AI tools, the change is coming. What will this mean for program design, execution speed, and organizational ability to retain the skills sets for difficult and complex decision making?
- Deep Time: The energy system takes a long time to change. Understanding and communicating realistic time horizons for emerging technologies is critical to avoiding disillusionment and funding busts. A thought experiment on fusion, carbon removal, and other potentially disruptive solutions.
- The Public-Private Venn Diagram of Interests: Government programs support commercialization of technologies and solutions that benefit the nation and the public. This puts them mostly, but not entirely, in line with industry expectations and goals. Being transparent about where and why parties have differing interests is critical to building understanding and trust.
Commercialization and Ecosystems
Commercialization is not linear. Effective progress requires understanding readiness, markets, and ecosystems that translate research into bankable projects.
▸Show/Hide posts
Coming soon
- The Value of Working with the National Labs: this complex contains a huge amount of expertise and capability, but ways to engage can seem opaque or carry high administrative burdens. Why you should (and how you can) collaborate with the National Labs.