So far so good
That’s a standard rider to all posts yes.
If I was Arsenal I would just win all the remaining games.
Where should nations invest in clean energy industries? The Clean Industrial Competitiveness Explorer from the Net Zero Industrial Policy Lab, which ROSEI's @bentleyallan.bsky.social is co-director of, helps identify where nations can compete. #HopkinsEnergy
energyinstitute.jhu.edu/a-new-compas...
Who could have predicted
With the Strait of Hormuz almost entirely closed, fertilizer producers face major disruptions during a critical time of planting season.
@noahjgordon.bsky.social and Lucy Corthell break down the potential strain on the global food system: carnegieendowment.org/emissary/202...
Aaaand the link to CICE itself: cice.netzeropolicylab.com
Big thanks to @jonasnahm.com for excellent comments on the piece.
In short, countries need to invest in their industrial base if they want to compete, and CICE gives countries a map and a strategic compass to navigate this terrain. Check out the full piece: neiscenter.substack.com/p/charting-p...
For example, the U.S. imposed anti-dumping duties on Chinese wind towers in 2012-13. But something unexpected happened: Chinese imports fell, but US competitiveness also declined. Tariffs increased the cost of U.S. manufacturing and US products were no longer competitive in a global market.
4. Tariffs aren't a substitute for capability-building. Tariff variables have low predictive power in our model. Industrial depth is the key factor. In a world of escalating trade restrictions, building domestic capabilities offers more strategic certainty than engaging in tariff wars.
The idea is that each technology requires a different combination of capabilities. Each technology has its own profile. Solar competitiveness is driven by metals and chemicals. Wind depends on heavy industrial machinery, iron and steel.
3. Upstream capabilities drive competitiveness more than final assembly. We found that five capabilities predict clean tech export competitiveness across technologies: electronics, machinery, metals, industrial materials, and chemicals.
These findings matter not just for industrial strategy focus, but for strategies designed to build overseas supply chains. For example, US investments in India may be well-placed to generate durable diversification away from China.
The US has real strengths in batteries, nuclear, and biofuels but lags peers in most other clean tech. India is top-10 in solar, wind, and nuclear, suggesting its manufacturing push is more successful than recognized.
2. Not every country should chase the same technologies.
Industrial strategy must be selective and focused. Attempting to compete across all clean technologies without the requisite industrial base risks spreading resources thinly and undermining competitiveness in areas where advantages are real.
China's high-speed rail strategy is a great example. They had no "natural" advantage, but they built strong "absorptive capacity." They acquired foreign technology, then placed it in cities with technologically related industrial clusters. The existing industrial base made the project viable.
1. Build on strengths, but don't be bound by them.
The old liberal view said: stick to your comparative advantage. Industrial policy advocates argued in response that comparative advantage is made not found. CICE operationalizes the latter view, but without letting countries get delusional.
That's the core problem CICE solves. Most countries lack rigorous tools to identify their existing industrial strengths and to understand how those strengths translate into opportunities in the clean economy. The model is built on four key premises.
Countries are being jolted by multiple shocks: the War on Iran, Trump's tariffs, China's manufacturing dominance, and the energy transition. Industrial strategy is a critical piece of the response. But to be strategic, states need new tools that orient and focus action.
Catherine Goldberg and I have a new piece on the New Energy /Industrial Strategy Center's substack on what my lab's flagship project--the Clean Industrial Capabilities Explorer--reveals about the global race for clean energy manufacturing. 🧵
time for a drink
This week Secretary Hegseth gave an object lesson in the folly of hyper-masculine overconfidence: the administration claimed all week that it controls the war and Iran‘s destiny without boots on the ground. They forgot we live in an asymmetric world in which small acts have big economic impacts.
My Trade Secrets today. Latest superpower energy offers to emerging markets:
China - cheap green tech to wean you off hydrocarbons.
US - coercion into trade deal to buy US fossil fuels, then huge chaotic war creating global oil shock.
WHICH MESSAGE WILL RESONATE? 1/2
as.ft.com/r/8b8df69a-5...
Where do oil prices go now that Iran counterattacks w missiles all across the Gulf.
A literal trillion dollar question
Insurance → shipping costs → oil prices → a global inflationary shock.
reporting @leeharris.ft.com
ft.com/content/2dc1...
Despite being a late entrant to the space industry, South Korea has rapidly caught up thanks to a combination of mutually reinforcing factors.
@darciedraudt.bsky.social examines these developments and explores how this momentum can be sustained: youtu.be/eVXH0EL22Xs
Drone manufacturing is about the tight integration of forward innovation, flexible manufacturing, and scaling.
The countries that win have modular, AI enabled manufacturing platforms. This is now the basis of physical security and economic competitiveness.
I wrote about driving a Chinese car, the automotive trend not of the future but of today
open.substack.com/pub/musgrave...
A quick hit to help make sense of Trump's tariffs
Is it the case that some kind of long-term financial repression will be necessary to fix the Canadian real estate market? Current government's public strategy is build more, but this only works with financial repression (maybe too harsh a term but you get me), no?
