Energy Geotechnology Dr. J. Carlos Santamarina Wednesday, October 22, 2025 | 1:30–2:30 PM
Dr J. Carlos Santamarina’s presentation on energy geotechnology was an interesting discussion on cleaner and more sustainable energy systems. Dr. Santamarina began by presenting data on the relation between energy consumption and life revealing how important energy is to extend lifespan, availability to water, decreasing infant mortality rates, and increasing schooling. While all these are inherently good outcomes of energy consumption, the downside to energy usage takes a toll on the environment through pollution. Dr. Santamarina emphasized the importance of a true Life Cycle Analysis (LCA), the full evaluation of the energy life cycle. He states that we never explore LCA fully. He then explained fossil fuels and the chemistry behind their usage to represent the amount of money used to produce amounts of CO2 emissions. While most of this sounds bad, Dr. Santamarina disclosed the good things about our attempts at lowering emissions. He presented data on the increased usage of solar energy systems and how the amount of carbon needed to produce energy has decreased as machine efficiency has increased.
Dr. Santamarina listed examples of energy geotechnology next, explaining how multiple different systems exist and are in the works to reduce emissions from energy production. Many of these technologies include using chemistry and material properties in order to trap emissions as they are released. He closed by proclaiming that change is coming, but not fast enough. Dr. Santamarina stated that it's not possible for emissions to be Net-zero by 2050. He said there are too many factors preventing these issues from being fixed, including inter and intra-national inequalities, overconsumption, underdeveloped technologies in developing cities, and leadership. His final statement presented the issue that the energy cycle is much longer than the political cycle (20 years vs. 4 years).
I found most of Dr. Santamarina’s points convincing due to the shear amount of data he presented. There was a lot of data revealing the amount of energy required for each person (he stated as 100-Watt per day) to survive and how people’s access to energy globally has increased steadily. I think that it is important to that he explains the amount of money it costs to produce the amount of energy nationally and how much CO2 is emitted per trillion (T) dollars (2T($) per 37T(kg CO2)). I think this was important in my realization of the severity of the issue at hand. I believe now that there is a huge issue because of the amount of money being spent to produce harmful waste into the environment.
I found that Dr. Santamarina’s discussion on energy geotechnology was a bit hard to follow, however, as he got into the specifics of how each system works. However, I understood the basic premise of each design. It seemed to be a common theme that each system had some sort of material property that removed emissions during the energy production process. I think this is a great way to reduce emissions and minimize environmental harm. Yet, I have a hard time seeing how this fixes the problem at hand. There still seems to be a lot of damage already caused by energy production, more than emissions of CO2 and methane have caused themselves. Dr. Santamarina does discuss physical waste like lithium batteries and their lifecycle. His explanation on these materials seemed a little short compared to his focus on the fossil fuel issue. I believe that this may be due to the severity of each issue in comparison. However, I still think that taking a more holistic approach to the issue at hand is better.
Dr. Santamarina’s explanation for why these systems and production of energy Geotechnology is not at the forefront of importance because of social and political tensions that draw away from the issue. I agree with his statement that the energy cycle, much larger than the political cycle, is a big reason why these problems are not addressed. Yet, I feel this does not fully override our ability as a society to make energy consumption a more pressing issue. I think that it would be better if the issue was properly revealed through its severity and the detrimental outcomes if we do not address the current state of energy consumption.
Where appropriate and possible, please include one or more photographs with appropriate captions. We know that not all experiences lend themselves to pictures, but in other cases they can greatly enhance the reader's experience. Plus, it gives you a chance to show yourself doing something outside the classroom.