1. Couldn't public research simply be crowding out private research?
It depends. There are plenty of examples of research that private companies don't want to do that the government is prepared to do.
It depends. There are plenty of examples of research that private companies don't want to do that the government is prepared to do.
The only companies who have been successful in long term research have had some kind of market dominance that was eventually tempered. E.g. AT&T Bell Labs or Microsoft. There are arguments out there that companies shouldn't become successful enough to do long term research, it doesn't really fit into a healthy dynamic market. Then you have companies like Google who are very successful in leveraging publicly funded research (self-driving cars...).
oh right, government funded ...
I call a field "fully subscribed" when it has enough money and researchers to make full progress. It's over subscribed when you are far into diminishing returns. And of course, under subscribed fields lack everything.
What is under subscribed today? Electric cars less than they were, but perhaps zero energy homes ...
There are a couple of caveats:
1) You can build homes which have worse energy efficiency than the requirements if you offset it somehow, e.g. by improving existing homes.
2) The definition of 'carbon-neutral' has been diluted for these regulations. For instance, it doesn't include appliances that you plug in.