Renewable energy sources have experienced unparalleled levels of financial backing in recent times. However, with political unpredictability overshadowing the future of subsidies for sustainable energy, these innovations must start to vie with fossil fuels on a level playing field, asserted attendees at the 2025 MIT Energy Conference.
“What these innovations require less of is stabilizers, and more of an equitable competitive environment,” stated Brian Deese, an MIT Institute Innovation Fellow, during the inaugural keynote panel of the conference.
The focus of the two-day event, organized annually by MIT students, was “Breakthrough to deployment: Driving climate innovation to market.” Presenters predominantly voiced hope regarding advancements in sustainable technology while also expressing occasional concerns about a swiftly evolving regulatory and political landscape.
Deese outlined what he referred to as “the good, the bad, and the ugly” of the existing energy framework. The positive aspect: Investments in clean energy in the United States achieved a record $272 billion in 2024. The negative: Announcements regarding future investments have decreased. And the bleak: Broader economic conditions are complicating efforts for utilities and private enterprises to expand the clean energy infrastructure necessary to satisfy rising energy demands.
“We need to erect substantial energy capacity in the United States,” Deese remarked. “And the three factors that most hinder construction are high uncertainty, elevated interest rates, and steep tariff rates. So that’s quite disheartening. But the question … is how, and in what ways, this underlying commercial momentum can prevail through such turbulent times.”
A transforming clean energy environment
In a discussion about artificial intelligence and increasing electricity needs, speakers noted that the technology could act as a driving force for clean energy innovations while also stressing existing infrastructures. “Google is dedicated to developing digital infrastructure thoughtfully, which includes fostering the establishment of clean energy systems that not only satisfy AI demands but also benefit the overall grid,” mentioned Lucia Tian, head of clean energy and decarbonization technologies at Google.
Over the course of the event, speakers highlighted that the cost-per-unit and scalability of clean energy innovations will ultimately dictate their success. They also recognized the influence of public policy and the necessity for governmental funding to address extensive issues like grid modernization.
Vanessa Chan, a past official at the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE) and current vice dean of innovation and entrepreneurship at the University of Pennsylvania’s School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, cautioned against the potential repercussions of proposed cuts to National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding for indirect research expenses, for instance. “Essentially, what you’re doing is undermining every single academic establishment conducting research throughout the country,” she stated.
During a panel titled “No clean energy transition without transmission,” Maria Robinson, former director of the DoE’s Grid Deployment Office, noted that ratepayers alone are unlikely to finance the necessary grid upgrades to match rising energy requirements. “The level of investment we’ll need in the next few years is going to be considerable,” she mentioned. “That’s where the federal government will have to intervene.”
David Cohen-Tanugi, a clean energy venture developer at MIT, pointed out that extreme weather occurrences have shifted the dialogue surrounding climate change in recent times. “A decade ago, the narrative was that … if we begin discussing resilience and adaptation to climate change, we’re essentially conceding or surrendering,” he said. “I’ve observed a significant shift in the investor narrative, the startup narrative, and more broadly, public awareness. There’s a realization that the impacts of climate change are already here.”
“All options are on the table”
The conference included panels and keynote talks on a variety of emerging clean energy technologies, such as hydrogen energy, geothermal power, and nuclear fusion, alongside a session on carbon capture.
Alex Creely, a chief engineer at Commonwealth Fusion Systems, clarified that fusion (the merging of small atoms into larger ones, the same process that powers stars) is both safer and potentially more cost-effective than conventional nuclear energy. Fusion facilities, he explained, can be turned off instantly, and companies like his are developing new, more affordable magnet technologies to manage the extreme heat generated by fusion reactors.
By the early 2030s, Creely indicated, his company aspires to operate 400-megawatt power facilities that consume only 50 kilograms of fuel annually. “If we can make fusion effective, it transforms energy into a manufactured good, rather than a natural resource,” he stated.
Quinn Woodard Jr., senior director of power generation and surface facilities at geothermal energy provider Fervo Energy, remarked that his company is making geothermal energy more cost-effective through standardization, innovation, and economies of scale. Traditionally, he noted, drilling is the most significant expense in generating geothermal power. Fervo has “completely altered the cost framework” with innovations in drilling technology, Woodard noted, and the company is now concentrating on reducing its power plant expenses.
“We must persistently focus on costs, and achieving that is essential for the success of the geothermal sector,” he stated.
One recurring theme throughout the conference: many strategies are progressing rapidly, yet experts are uncertain about when — or in some instances, if — each particular technology will attain a critical point capable of reshaping energy markets.
“I don’t want to find myself in a position where we often regress in this climate solution discourse, where it becomes an either-or situation,” stated Peter Ellis, global director of nature climate solutions at The Nature Conservancy. “We’re addressing the most significant challenge civilization has ever encountered. We require all options on the table.”
The path forward
Multiple speakers emphasized the necessity for collaboration among academia, industry, and government to achieve climate and energy objectives. Amy Luers, senior global director of sustainability at Microsoft, likened the challenge to the Apollo space program and remarked that academic institutions must concentrate more on scaling and stimulating investments in sustainable energy.
“The difficulty lies in the fact that academic institutions are not presently structured to grasp the how-to in driving both bottom-up and top-down shifts over time,” Luers noted. “If the world is to succeed on the journey toward net zero, the mentality in academia must evolve. Fortunately, this transformation is beginning.”
During a discussion titled “From lab to grid: Scaling first-of-a-kind energy technologies,” Hannan Happi, CEO of renewable energy firm Exowatt, emphasized that electricity is fundamentally a commodity. “Electrons are fundamentally identical,” he remarked. “The only aspect [customers] care about with respect to electrons is that they are accessible when needed, and that they’re affordable.”
Melissa Zhang, principal at Azimuth Capital Management, pointed out that developing energy infrastructure typically requires at least five to ten years — longer than the duration of a U.S. political cycle. Yet, she cautioned that sustainable energy technologies are unlikely to garner major support from the federal government in the imminent future. “If you find yourself in something that’s a bit too reliant on subsidies … there’s justification to be apprehensive about this administration,” she stated.
World Energy CEO Gene Gebolys, who moderated the lab-to-grid panel, listed several companies established at MIT. “They all share one commonality,” he stated. “They all transitioned from someone’s concept, to a laboratory, to proof-of-concept, to a larger scale. It’s not as if any of this ever reaches a conclusion. It’s an ongoing journey.”