Since there are no currently active contests, we have switched Climate CoLab to read-only mode.
Learn more at
Skip navigation
Share conversation: Share via:

Mohammad Aatish Khan

Aug 13, 2015


1 |
Share via:
Thank you for submitting your proposal to this Climate CoLab contest. Because you had submitted it before July 18th, the contest Judges were able to review your proposal and provide you with some feedback, which we have included below. We hope that you will use it to further develop your work before the August 31 deadline. On that date at midnight Eastern Time, your proposal will be locked and considered in final form. The Judges will then select which proposals will continue to the Finalists round. Finalists are eligible for the contest’s Judges Choice award, as well as for public voting to select the contest’s Popular Choice award. The Winners will receive a special invitation to attend selected sessions at MIT’s SOLVE conference and showcase their work before key constituents in a workshop the next day. A few select Climate CoLab winners will join distinguished SOLVE attendees in a highly collaborative problem-solving session. In addition, if your plan is included in one or more winning global plans, you will receive Climate CoLab Points, and the top point-getters will receive shares of a cash prize of $10,000. Thank you for your great work and good luck! 2015 Climate CoLab Judges & Fellows Judges Feedbak 1: The proposal considers different forms of renewable energy (solar,wind, wave, biogas and biofuels) to contribute towards meeting the energy needs of the country. However, it would require significant improvement in terms of a) Feasibility : linkage to governments plans already rolled out and how the proposal could help accelerate or contribute to the achievement of those goals/targets b) Novelty: The proposal considers various renewable energy options but does not stand out in terms of any significant key innovative contribution (either in terms of technology solutions or business models) c) Impact and presentation quality: The proposal needs to be made more cohesive rather than listing a set of different renewable energy options. It would probably make much greater impact if the current scenario in the country is considered and specific solutions are outlined for the key challenges in terms of technical, economic, social and political aspects. Judges 2: This proposal is basically a compendium of known GHG-mitigating technologies.The authors have made back-of-the envelope attempts to assess the GHG-reduction potential of these technologies but not considered in any detail the economics of these options or what the challenges to deployment at this scale might be. In some cases, the authors simply have repeated existing government plans (as in the case of wind); in other cases, the authors have not taken into account past experiences with deployment (as in the case of biogas); and with emerging technologies (such as wave energy or electric cars), the authors have just assumed that the technology is technically and commercially feasible for large-scale deployment. This proposal, as it stands, gives no guidance at all as to how any of these options can realistically be deployed at scale. There is no dearth of technological options, many even negative cost, to reduce GHG emissions (see, for example, the McKinsey cost curves) but the key question is what policies and strategies could be employed to successfully deploy these technologies, taking into account real-world economic, social, and political considerations.

Shaival Shah

Aug 27, 2015


2 |
Share via:
Respected Sir, Thank you for your suggestions. We will revamp our existing proposal and come up with a new integrated plan. Best Regards, Shaival