Rising Wisely

Yesterday, I was reading a bit about the field of post-normal science and came across the concept of science shops. This was something I had never encountered before since I am from the United States.  In the U.S. we have something called Science Salons–where scientists give talks and answer questions in a public setting.  The science shop idea, however, made immediate sense in a much more practical way, and I knew exactly what they were.  The Science Shop Network describes them this way:

“Science Shops are not “shops” in the traditional sense of the word. They are small entities that carry out scientific research in a wide range of disciplines – usually free of charge and – on behalf of citizens and local civil society. The fact that Science shops respond to civil society’s needs for expertise and knowledge is a key element that distinguish them from other knowledge transfer mechanisms. Science Shops are often, but not always, linked to universities, where students conduct the research as part of their curriculum.”

The journal Nature published an article in 2001 that described how the shops were making a comeback after they were pioneered by the Dutch in the (now) European Union and were spreading to other developing regions including South Africa.

Science shops (or Vignyana Angadi in Kannada) provide an interface between science and society in a way that large-infrastructure science isn’t necessarily equipped to handle.  Reading these articles makes me wonder about the potential value of these shops in India, what they would looks like, and how they might operate.

Given the gaps recently highlighted between the success of the large-scale science projects and the work that need to be done to both leverage the existing scientific literacy and improve upon it for other members of India’s population, perhaps a model like this could serve as a waypoint for addressing “street-level” concerns. In many cases scientific methodologies already enable the tools to solve or inform many common problems. What we lack is the political and social agency to implement them on a large scale.

What do you think a Science Angadi should look like?

Our contributor this week is Mustafa Biviji, who is pursuing his summer internship with CSTEP and is a Masters Student of Engineering and Technology Innovation Management at Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.


I have been fascinated by the concept of using solar and wind energy to power all kinds of things. As I learnt of the potential of renewable energy over the years, and in seeing some initial-stage, phased out implementation projects, I now wonder why the nomenclature of Alternative Energy is applied to these forms of energy.



The name Renewable Energy makes sense and is aptly used, but the name alternative energy evokes the single important question that the industry is trying to answer – what will happen when these so-called alternatives become mainstream? As we all know, the term “alternative” is used to designate a substitute for a primary source.

Different forms of renewable energy like solar and wind might satisfy this definition somewhat; however, when analyzed conceptually, chemical and solar energy form the basis of all other forms of energy, be it conventional, unconventional, or renewable.


The questions “What would have been of earth without the sun?” or, more accurately, “Would the earth have survived without the apt proximity of the sun?” are asked repeatedly. Though mass and energy are two critical components, an external force is needed for these components to play a useful role on earth. This force is usually manifested in the form of solar energy, which has acted as a catalyst for the earth to be a living planet. So while most scientists are in agreement about the important role of solar energy, power engineers and a large number of consumers still designate it as an alternative source!


This approach raises the question of a change in attitude from the industry and from consumers of energy. Instead of the term “alternative,” why not call solar energy “real” or “natural” energy?
Let us take the parallel case example of food. There is the perception of organic and/or natural foods as being the best for our health. In reality, they are supposed to be healthy and true foods. Just as those foods that contain minimal artificial ingredients are best for consumers, energy solutions that utilize minimal conventional energy might be better for the planet.


Producers and distributors in the energy sector could consider changing their marketing verbiage and promote “alternative energy” as “real energy”. This might start a backward chain reaction with competitors and industries more readily opting for a renewable energy approach.


I’d like to share a real life example here. The financial entity PNC Bank, which is headquartered in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (USA) claims that employees in green offices with natural lighting are much more satisfied than in non-green offices. This ploy of featuring real/renewable energy in allied product or service marketing could positively affect the renewable energy industry goals in the long run, and help reduce environmental degradation.