scientificamerican--2020-11-06--Energy Department Looks to Boost Hydrogen Fuel for Big Trucks

The Department of Energy is planning to invest $ 100 million over the next five years into research for hydrogen-powered heavy-duty trucks .
The outcome could be the development of larger , more efficient and cost-effective electrolyzers that will use a variety of technologies to split hydrogen from water .
The idea is to form two large partnerships that include DOE national laboratories , universities and private companies to help jump-start what has been a very slow-moving American approach to the `` hydrogen economy . ''
It is a concept focused on emissions-free energy that began with discussions in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But commercialization efforts during the past decade have been led by Japan , China , France and other European nations .
In 2003 , President George W. Bush tried to awaken the nation to the energy possibilities in hydrogen — the world 's lightest , most abundant element .
In his State of the Union speech in January 2003 , he noted that a fuel cell using hydrogen and oxygen `` generates energy , which can be used to power a car producing only water , not exhaust fumes . ''
A `` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Bush predicted , would mean that `` the first car driven by a child born today could be powered by hydrogen and pollution-free . ''
That created a stir of interest but not a national commitment .
That child — who would now be 17 — would be hard-pressed to find a fuel-cell-powered car , let alone a place to refuel it .
There are estimated to be 8,000 fuel-cell cars in the United States .
Most of them were made in Japan , and most of the 50-odd stations that sell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for fuel-cell-powered trucks , `` nothing from the U.S. is on the road right now , '' explained Adam Weber , who leads DOE 's fuel-cell truck commercialization program at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in Berkeley , Calif .
He estimates there will be a `` fair amount '' on the roads within the next five to 10 years because more states are trying to follow California 's commitment to emissions-free vehicles .
Heavy trucks , Weber believes , will also help make fuel-cell cars more commercially viable .
Because hydrogen fuel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it could make trucks more efficient because they could carry more cargo , refuel more quickly and drive longer distances .
The only tailpipe emissions are water ; that could help make hydrogen trucks attractive in states that outlaw idling by diesel trucks .
Moreover , Weber said in an interview , the resulting electric truck engines will require less maintenance because they have fewer moving parts than diesel engines .
The goal of Weber 's research program is to help truck manufacturers make prototypes with more durable fuel-cell technologies that could have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the road .
A side benefit , he predicts , will be more hydrogen-fueling stations for cars and trucks across the United States .
The new DOE approach that focuses on the seeming technology magic of hydrogen may also work to fill in the gaps being created by states like California that are mandating ambitious clean energy goals .
In California 's case , that means emissions-free new cars and trucks by 2036 and 100 % clean energy by 2045 .
There is still a long road ahead .
According to DOE , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tons of hydrogen currently produced in the United States .
annually is made from reacting natural gas with steam .
The resulting hydrogen is used commercially to make fuel in oil refineries and to create ammonia for use in fertilizers .
But hydrogen can also be made with electrolyzers , devices that can use electricity from solar and wind power to split hydrogen out of water .
One of the commercial uses for hydrogen that DOE intends to encourage is the generation and storage of energy , which can be converted back to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or burned in place of natural gas to make electricity .
This hydrogen , sometimes called `` green hydrogen , '' can be stored for months in underground reservoirs — used today to keep natural gas — and can then be reconverted into electricity , a process that some experts call `` power to gas to power . ''
The storage process will likely be crucial for California , which will mainly depend on solar and wind power to reach its clean energy goals .
Nathan Lewis , a professor of chemistry at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concluded that renewable energy may satisfy as much as 80 % of the state 's power needs .
But after that , the variability of wind and solar could create what he calls energy `` resource droughts , '' which might require shipments of electricity from out of state .
`` You would have blackouts , '' Lewis recently explained at a forum held by the California Hydrogen Business Council .
`` Wildfires might give you additional droughts , '' he added .
He and other experts have noted that the cheapest way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ store green hydrogen .
It would be much cheaper and more effective than buying large lithium-ion batteries or building solar farms across the state , he said .
Keith Wipke , manager of DOE 's new fuel cell and hydrogen technology program , explains that the goal is to help companies make electrolyzers that are more efficient , cheaper and durable than today 's machines .
The goal is to make their `` green '' hydrogen more competitive with the hydrogen made from natural gas .
After that , he explained in an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on extending hydrogen into other uses including truck fuel and enlarging the energy storage market .
`` If we get electrolysis cheap enough , then you can start to compete with natural gas for making hydrogen at large scale , '' Wipke said , referring to hydrogen made with renewable electricity .
The research , he hopes , will provide technologies for bigger and better electrolyzers that can supply utilities and truck and car refueling stations .
There will be other transportation needs .
San Francisco is about to get its first fuel-cell-powered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have recently developed fuel-cell-powered trains .
Japan , whose commitment to hydrogen may be the most ambitious , is planning an Olympics for next summer where athletes will be driven around in fuel-cell buses and live in a village powered by fuel cells .
Some of the energy may come from Australia , where companies are planning new exports of green hydrogen made from its abundant sunshine to help power Japan .
All of this may still sound dreamy to some , or like green washing to others , but DOE points out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the `` hydrogen economy '' may finally have enough energy to take off in the United States .
According to DOE , the current price for green hydrogen is somewhere between $ 5 and $ 6 per kilogram .
The aim is not to invent exotic new technologies , but to give existing technology a push with the hopes of driving its price down to $ 2 per kg .
Green hydrogen is still a lightweight in the U.S. energy industry , but it has the potential to become a powerful mover .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ hydrogen has the equivalent amount of energy provided by 1 gallon of gasoline .
Reprinted from Climatewire with permission from E & E News .
E & E provides daily coverage of essential energy and environmental news at www.eenews.net .

The Department of Energy is planning to invest $100 million over the next five years into research for hydrogen-powered heavy-duty trucks.
The outcome could be the development of larger, more efficient and cost-effective electrolyzers that will use a variety of technologies to split hydrogen from water.
The idea is to form two large partnerships that include DOE national laboratories, universities and private companies to help jump-start what has been a very slow-moving American approach to the "hydrogen economy."
It is a concept focused on emissions-free energy that began with discussions in the United States as early as 1966. But commercialization efforts during the past decade have been led by Japan, China, France and other European nations.
In 2003, President George W. Bush tried to awaken the nation to the energy possibilities in hydrogen — the world's lightest, most abundant element. In his State of the Union speech in January 2003, he noted that a fuel cell using hydrogen and oxygen "generates energy, which can be used to power a car producing only water, not exhaust fumes."
A "new national commitment" to use it, Bush predicted, would mean that "the first car driven by a child born today could be powered by hydrogen and pollution-free."
That created a stir of interest but not a national commitment.
That child — who would now be 17 — would be hard-pressed to find a fuel-cell-powered car, let alone a place to refuel it. There are estimated to be 8,000 fuel-cell cars in the United States. Most of them were made in Japan, and most of the 50-odd stations that sell hydrogen fuel are in California.
As for fuel-cell-powered trucks, "nothing from the U.S. is on the road right now," explained Adam Weber, who leads DOE's fuel-cell truck commercialization program at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in Berkeley, Calif.
He estimates there will be a "fair amount" on the roads within the next five to 10 years because more states are trying to follow California's commitment to emissions-free vehicles. Heavy trucks, Weber believes, will also help make fuel-cell cars more commercially viable.
Because hydrogen fuel weighs much less than electric batteries, it could make trucks more efficient because they could carry more cargo, refuel more quickly and drive longer distances.
The only tailpipe emissions are water; that could help make hydrogen trucks attractive in states that outlaw idling by diesel trucks. Moreover, Weber said in an interview, the resulting electric truck engines will require less maintenance because they have fewer moving parts than diesel engines.
The goal of Weber's research program is to help truck manufacturers make prototypes with more durable fuel-cell technologies that could have a lifetime of a million miles on the road. A side benefit, he predicts, will be more hydrogen-fueling stations for cars and trucks across the United States.
The new DOE approach that focuses on the seeming technology magic of hydrogen may also work to fill in the gaps being created by states like California that are mandating ambitious clean energy goals. In California's case, that means emissions-free new cars and trucks by 2036 and 100% clean energy by 2045.
There is still a long road ahead. According to DOE, 95% of the 10 million metric tons of hydrogen currently produced in the United States. annually is made from reacting natural gas with steam. The resulting hydrogen is used commercially to make fuel in oil refineries and to create ammonia for use in fertilizers.
But hydrogen can also be made with electrolyzers, devices that can use electricity from solar and wind power to split hydrogen out of water.
One of the commercial uses for hydrogen that DOE intends to encourage is the generation and storage of energy, which can be converted back to electricity through conversion in a fuel cell or burned in place of natural gas to make electricity.
This hydrogen, sometimes called "green hydrogen," can be stored for months in underground reservoirs — used today to keep natural gas — and can then be reconverted into electricity, a process that some experts call "power to gas to power."
The storage process will likely be crucial for California, which will mainly depend on solar and wind power to reach its clean energy goals. Nathan Lewis, a professor of chemistry at the California Institute of Technology, has concluded that renewable energy may satisfy as much as 80% of the state's power needs.
But after that, the variability of wind and solar could create what he calls energy "resource droughts," which might require shipments of electricity from out of state.
"You would have blackouts," Lewis recently explained at a forum held by the California Hydrogen Business Council. "Wildfires might give you additional droughts," he added.
He and other experts have noted that the cheapest way to fill the gaps would be to store green hydrogen. It would be much cheaper and more effective than buying large lithium-ion batteries or building solar farms across the state, he said.
Keith Wipke, manager of DOE's new fuel cell and hydrogen technology program, explains that the goal is to help companies make electrolyzers that are more efficient, cheaper and durable than today's machines.
The goal is to make their "green" hydrogen more competitive with the hydrogen made from natural gas.
After that, he explained in an interview, the next step would focus on extending hydrogen into other uses including truck fuel and enlarging the energy storage market.
"If we get electrolysis cheap enough, then you can start to compete with natural gas for making hydrogen at large scale," Wipke said, referring to hydrogen made with renewable electricity.
The research, he hopes, will provide technologies for bigger and better electrolyzers that can supply utilities and truck and car refueling stations. There will be other transportation needs. San Francisco is about to get its first fuel-cell-powered ferry boat, and China and Germany have recently developed fuel-cell-powered trains.
Japan, whose commitment to hydrogen may be the most ambitious, is planning an Olympics for next summer where athletes will be driven around in fuel-cell buses and live in a village powered by fuel cells. Some of the energy may come from Australia, where companies are planning new exports of green hydrogen made from its abundant sunshine to help power Japan.
All of this may still sound dreamy to some, or like green washing to others, but DOE points out that after six decades of discussion, the "hydrogen economy" may finally have enough energy to take off in the United States.
According to DOE, the current price for green hydrogen is somewhere between $5 and $6 per kilogram. The aim is not to invent exotic new technologies, but to give existing technology a push with the hopes of driving its price down to $2 per kg.
Green hydrogen is still a lightweight in the U.S. energy industry, but it has the potential to become a powerful mover. According to DOE, 1 kg of hydrogen has the equivalent amount of energy provided by 1 gallon of gasoline.
Reprinted from Climatewire with permission from E&E News. E&E provides daily coverage of essential energy and environmental news at www.eenews.net.


scientificamerican--2020-11-06--Science Sound(E)scapes: Head Banging and Howling in the Amazon

Today : the final episode in our three-part sound escape to the Amazon rain forest .
In today ’ s episode , we ’ re going into the trees .
And be sure to catch the other episodes of this podcast miniseries .
The first one was on the pink river dolphin .
The second was on the frog choruses .
Tim Weaver is back with us to finish our Amazon audio tour .
And just to remind you , Tim is a professor of emergent digital practices and a multimedia and sound artist at the University of Denver .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ through drowned forests .
We ’ ve taken sonic strolls , very carefully , through the understory , awash in frog music .
And now we ascend into the trees .
Tim , tell us a little bit about where we ’ re going and what we ’ re going to find up there .
“ We ’ ve been through three layers of the Amazon : underwater to the forest-floor story .
And now we ’ ll go up into the canopy .
It ’ s a totally different ecosystem up there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but , again , it ’ s incredibly biodiverse .
There are mammals that live up there .
There ’ s species that have yet to be discovered up there .
And of course , birds and amphibians lay their eggs up there in the bromeliads .
“ So the technology we ’ re using to do this is a small recorder that can be deployed for actually multiple months .
So you can schedule to take a recording every half hour from midnight to two in the morning or however you want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interested in testing these out with was to record howler monkeys , which change their territory every morning .
They set the territory before dawn , and it ’ s like the wakening of the world .
“ And the other species that ’ s very interesting in that canopy that is endangered and has gone extinct in North America is a family of woodpeckers called Campephilus woodpeckers .
They ’ re the largest in the Americas .
They ’ re about the size of a red-tail hawk .
They did go from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the imperials in the sierras in Mexico , all the way down to southern Patagonian with the Magellanic woodpeckers , and this species is a crimson-crested .
They ’ re in the Amazon .
They ’ re in the upper Amazon , in the cloud forests as well .
So you ’ ll hear them drumming on trees .
They ’ re indicative of a very healthy forest because they have to live in a tree that they can have their nests in the middle of .
So they ’ re large , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ll hear them drumming .
“ This is could be in the afternoon when the howler monkeys reset their territory and it just sounds like this incredible rushing of wind from the Gods coming to you and they clear out to set their territory in the canopy at the same time so there 's an inner dispersion of those two species.
” So how high do you have to climb to place the mics ?
“ So we ’ re setting them in small trees that are fairly tall , so we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way in the canopy , but we can hear the canopy .
And they ’ re above the forest floor so that nothing will climb up the trees and eat them .
So if we were in North America , we ’ d worry about bears eating them .
If we ’ re in the canopy , you would worry about things like macaws going down and being curious and cutting them open .
So you take a tree that ’ s a smaller tree but is tall enough that it is about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so you can bend it down , set it and then let it come back up .
It ’ s above the forest floor , but the canopy is 150 feet up , so we ’ re getting the animals in the canopy and their sound coming down to above our own head limit .
But it ’ s not on the forest floor.
” Tell me a little bit about sounding a canopy .
We ’ re so used to hearing sounds that bounce off of hard surfaces all around us without @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ground , buildings .
What does it sound like when you ’ re up in midair ?
“ Well , there ’ s multiple types of reflection going on in the cloud forest and also in the rain forest as well .
And those surfaces are very waxy .
The leaves have a certain geometry and , depending on the season , frogs and bats can use a geometry of the leaves to strategically to hunt with .
So if bats are hunting at night , they can ricochet their echolocation off of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way .
“ The length of songs and the wavelength of songs and things like that and communication are really based on those surfaces .
And they ’ re very different than a North American temperate forest .
So if you were recording in , say , British Columbia in the Sitka spruce , the sound will go out and almost doesn ’ t come back because there ’ s so much organic on the trunks .
And that ’ s not the case in the Amazon .
The trunks of these Cebu @ @ @ @ @ @ @ covered with moss the same way they might be in the North American temperate forest , even though that ’ s incredibly wet .
“ It ’ s also very new territory for looking at ecologies , sound , so we ’ re really learning about that .
So there ’ s a lot of enthusiastic people doing this work .
And these devices were talking about , these audio moths , are becoming really instrumental so that if you can set out an array of 100 of these and come back in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ charge for a month , and they ’ re really small ; you can fit them in the palm of your hand—you would gather more data than had ever been taken , in relation to this forest .
So it ’ s a good time for doing this work.
” So that ’ s a lot of data .
I imagine it ’ s not exactly easy to just pull the good stuff right out .
“ So visually , you can you can look at the spectrograms .
So once you understand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the sound is , then you could scroll through things .
But scrolling through things for a month ’ s worth of data is very daunting .
So you can actually have an artificial intelligence training done on the sound itself but also on the spectrogram .
“ You can process this in the cloud when you get back here .
This is also something done with ocean recording , where they ’ re able to put out ocean recorders for a month to listen to mammalian communication with pinnipeds or whales or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really want to do this with long-term recordings for the pink river dolphins .
But because the river goes up and down 20 to 30 feet every year , we ’ re trying to figure out where we deploy those recorders that could be out there as a big hard drive recording and bring it back to the studio and then go through it with AI or visually to see where we can find interesting things happening.
” It sounds like we ’ re only beginning to understand what these ecosystems sound like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more to discover .
“ This is kind of a golden era , right now , for ecoacoustics .
But conversely , Bernie Krause , who ’ s been recording since the 1970s and 1980s , said that 85 percent of what he recorded has gone extinct already , in terms of acoustic ecologies .
So it ’ s changing every day like we know is happening in our world .
And what we ’ re trying to catch up to is disappearing as fast as we ’ re getting new data.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s a good time to climb to where we can hear better .
[ CLIP : Howler monkeys and woodpeckers in the trees ] Thank you , Tim , for sharing you working sounds with us over the last three episodes of the 60-Second Science podcast .
And thank you to all the listeners for tuning in .
We will have more experimental features like this in the podcast in the future .
Until then : earphones on .
[ The above text is a transcript of this podcast . ]

Full Transcript
This is Scientific American’s 60-Second Science. I’m Jeff DelViscio.
Today: the final episode in our three-part sound escape to the Amazon rain forest. In today’s episode, we’re going into the trees. And be sure to catch the other episodes of this podcast miniseries. The first one was on the pink river dolphin. The second was on the frog choruses.
Tim Weaver is back with us to finish our Amazon audio tour.
“Thanks, Jeff.”
And just to remind you, Tim is a professor of emergent digital practices and a multimedia and sound artist at the University of Denver. Together, we chased pink river dolphins through drowned forests. We’ve taken sonic strolls, very carefully, through the understory, awash in frog music. And now we ascend into the trees. Tim, tell us a little bit about where we’re going and what we’re going to find up there.
“We’ve been through three layers of the Amazon: underwater to the forest-floor story. And now we’ll go up into the canopy. It’s a totally different ecosystem up there and very difficult to record up there but, again, it’s incredibly biodiverse. There are mammals that live up there. There’s species that have yet to be discovered up there. And of course, birds and amphibians lay their eggs up there in the bromeliads.
“So the technology we’re using to do this is a small recorder that can be deployed for actually multiple months. So you can schedule to take a recording every half hour from midnight to two in the morning or however you want to sample. And what I was interested in testing these out with was to record howler monkeys, which change their territory every morning. They set the territory before dawn, and it’s like the wakening of the world.
“And the other species that’s very interesting in that canopy that is endangered and has gone extinct in North America is a family of woodpeckers called Campephilus woodpeckers. They’re the largest in the Americas. They’re about the size of a red-tail hawk. They did go from the ivory bills in North America to the imperials in the sierras in Mexico, all the way down to southern Patagonian with the Magellanic woodpeckers, and this species is a crimson-crested. They’re in the Amazon. They’re in the upper Amazon, in the cloud forests as well. So you’ll hear them drumming on trees. They’re indicative of a very healthy forest because they have to live in a tree that they can have their nests in the middle of. So they’re large, and these are hardwood—incredible hardwood forests—so you’ll hear them drumming.
“This is could be in the afternoon when the howler monkeys reset their territory and it just sounds like this incredible rushing of wind from the Gods coming to you and they clear out to set their territory in the canopy at the same time so there's an inner dispersion of those two species.”
So how high do you have to climb to place the mics?
“So we’re setting them in small trees that are fairly tall, so we can get up into them—not all the way in the canopy, but we can hear the canopy. And they’re above the forest floor so that nothing will climb up the trees and eat them. So if we were in North America, we’d worry about bears eating them. If we’re in the canopy, you would worry about things like macaws going down and being curious and cutting them open. So you take a tree that’s a smaller tree but is tall enough that it is about 12 feet off the forest floor, so you can bend it down, set it and then let it come back up. It’s above the forest floor, but the canopy is 150 feet up, so we’re getting the animals in the canopy and their sound coming down to above our own head limit. But it’s not on the forest floor.”
Tell me a little bit about sounding a canopy. We’re so used to hearing sounds that bounce off of hard surfaces all around us without realizing it: walls, ceilings, ground, buildings. What does it sound like when you’re up in midair?
“Well, there’s multiple types of reflection going on in the cloud forest and also in the rain forest as well. And those surfaces are very waxy. The leaves have a certain geometry and, depending on the season, frogs and bats can use a geometry of the leaves to strategically to hunt with. So if bats are hunting at night, they can ricochet their echolocation off of a leaf configuration and find moths that way.
“The length of songs and the wavelength of songs and things like that and communication are really based on those surfaces. And they’re very different than a North American temperate forest. So if you were recording in, say, British Columbia in the Sitka spruce, the sound will go out and almost doesn’t come back because there’s so much organic on the trunks. And that’s not the case in the Amazon. The trunks of these Cebu trees and things like that are not covered with moss the same way they might be in the North American temperate forest, even though that’s incredibly wet.
“It’s also very new territory for looking at ecologies, sound, so we’re really learning about that. So there’s a lot of enthusiastic people doing this work. And these devices were talking about, these audio moths, are becoming really instrumental so that if you can set out an array of 100 of these and come back in a month—and they’ll hold a charge for a month, and they’re really small; you can fit them in the palm of your hand—you would gather more data than had ever been taken, in relation to this forest. So it’s a good time for doing this work.”
So that’s a lot of data. I imagine it’s not exactly easy to just pull the good stuff right out.
“So visually, you can you can look at the spectrograms. So once you understand what you know the visual print of the sound is, then you could scroll through things. But scrolling through things for a month’s worth of data is very daunting. So you can actually have an artificial intelligence training done on the sound itself but also on the spectrogram.
“You can process this in the cloud when you get back here. This is also something done with ocean recording, where they’re able to put out ocean recorders for a month to listen to mammalian communication with pinnipeds or whales or any of those things.
“We really want to do this with long-term recordings for the pink river dolphins. But because the river goes up and down 20 to 30 feet every year, we’re trying to figure out where we deploy those recorders that could be out there as a big hard drive recording and bring it back to the studio and then go through it with AI or visually to see where we can find interesting things happening.”
It sounds like we’re only beginning to understand what these ecosystems sound like, and there’s so much more to discover.
“This is kind of a golden era, right now, for ecoacoustics. But conversely, Bernie Krause, who’s been recording since the 1970s and 1980s, said that 85 percent of what he recorded has gone extinct already, in terms of acoustic ecologies. So it’s changing every day like we know is happening in our world. And what we’re trying to catch up to is disappearing as fast as we’re getting new data.”
With that, I think it’s a good time to climb to where we can hear better.
[CLIP: Howler monkeys and woodpeckers in the trees]
Thank you, Tim, for sharing you working sounds with us over the last three episodes of the 60-Second Science podcast. And thank you to all the listeners for tuning in. We will have more experimental features like this in the podcast in the future. Until then: earphones on.
[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]


scientificamerican--2020-11-05--There's No Good Evidence That Psychedelics Can Change Your Politics or Religion

Psychedelics are psychoactive substances that historically have attracted exaggerations of benefits as well as alarmism .
As with most subjects that bring out extreme views , the scientific data provide a more grounded perspective .
Sometimes , the scientific data require further clarification .
We are responding to a thought-provoking opinion piece by Eddie Jacobs published on October 11 , 2020 entitled “ What if a Pill Can Change Your Politics or Religious Beliefs ?
Some could mistakenly take away from the piece an unrealistic impression that is not supported by the scientific data .
We worry that this may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ piece raises ethical questions regarding emerging research suggesting psychedelics may be effective psychiatric treatments .
Specifically , the concern is that psychedelic therapy could shift patients ’ political beliefs “ in one direction along the political spectrum ” or “ change [ their ] religious beliefs.
” We agree that as with any emerging medical treatment , psychedelic therapy prompts important ethical considerations ; however , we believe that the possibility implied in the headline––that psychedelics prompt substantial change in political and religious beliefs or affiliations––is not supported by the current scientific data @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not mention affiliations , but we believe readers might reasonably take away this interpretation .
We suggest that there is no evidence that people change political or religious affiliations from psychedelic treatments , and current evidence for other kinds of belief changes is weak .
Below , we address the three major studies mentioned in the original article .
The concern about political beliefs largely rests on evidence from a small pilot study of psilocybin for treating depression .
The study showed an average reduction on a measure of “ authoritarianism ” from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seven people .
Authoritarianism , as it is operationalized here using five questions that were reduced from the original version of the scale , likely does not fit neatly into a particular political party .
Many people , for example , would likely disagree with the scale item “ The law should always be obeyed , even if a particular law is wrong , ” regardless of political affiliation .
It is also not clear that a reduction in authoritarianism ( or increase in libertarianism or social/moral liberalism , the other end of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to present political affiliations .
There are abundant historical examples of both left-wing and right-wing authoritarian governments ( for example , communism and fascism , respectively ) .
Moreover , in a country such as the United States , the major left-and right-leaning parties have generally had no universal leaning toward either individual freedom or state control .
The position taken along this continuum is highly dependent on the subject ( for example , business regulation , abortion , gun control , social constraints on sexual behavior ) .
In fact , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not to use the term “ liberal ” in reference to the scale because that term had a political meaning in the United States that went beyond what the scale measures .
Beyond the theoretical issues with mapping authoritarianism onto present political parties , there are also statistical concerns with this study .
The finding about reduced authoritarianism barely met the threshold of significance –– and with a one-tailed t-test .
A one-tailed test provides a lower standard for achieving significance compared to the much more common two-tailed test .
It is unclear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with a two-tailed test .
In any case , the effect did not last .
At the 7–12 month follow-up the decrease was not significant , even according to the lower standards of the one-tailed test .
Jacobs ’ piece alluded to another study about political beliefs , a 1971 study exploring the association between LSD increased liberalism .
This study compared three groups : 1 ) people who had taken LSD as a medical treatment , 2 ) people who had taken LSD on their own , and 3 ) people who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who had taken LSD on their own indicated more support for policies like “ individual freedom ” and “ foreign policy liberalism ” compared to those who had not taken LSD .
It is possible that those who were willing to take LSD outside of medical treatment may have already been more influenced by the liberal hippie movement that encouraged these beliefs at that time ( Jacobs notes that this is correlational and not causal data ) .
Importantly , no differences were found in this study between the political beliefs of those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to those who did not take LSD .
Therefore , this study actually suggests that medical psychedelic treatments do not alter political beliefs !
In terms of religious beliefs , Jacobs ’ piece points to a concern about belief change on the basis of a survey study by our group at Johns Hopkins .
This survey specifically recruited individuals who had a “ God encounter experience ” after taking a psychedelic outside of a research context .
Before having such an experience during their psychedelic session , 21 percent retrospectively identified as atheist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the experience .
This decrease was accompanied by a decrease in identification with major religions , alongside increases in spiritual types of self-identification .
Crucially though , this study was in no way representative of the general public , as only people who reported encountering “ God ” or a similar phenomenon were included in the study .
This was a very specific sample of people reporting a special kind of experience or interpretation of experience .
The study can not provide an estimate of population rates .
Belief changes of a religious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ massively inflated in this sample , and it is therefore not appropriate to draw generalized conclusions about belief change from psychedelic treatments based on these data .
Lastly , the piece cites the observation that under clinical conditions psychedelics increase , on average , a personality trait called openness to experience , a finding first reported by our group at Johns Hopkins and now replicated by others .
Unlike the political and religious effects , this phenomenon appears more robust .
However , while psychedelics might be unique in their ability to prompt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a short-term clinical procedure , they are not the only clinical intervention that can cause changes in personality traits .
A large meta-analysis of over 200 published studies examining the effect of psychiatric treatments on personality traits found that personality was indeed changed .
Regardless of whether the intervention was a psychotherapy or a medication such as a traditional antidepressant drug , these changes reached a moderate effect size for increases in the trait of emotional stability , similar to the effect size observed for the increase in personality openness to experience from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ openness to experience and liberal political views is small , accounting for only around 2 percent of the relationship between the two variables .
In other words , the pathway from psychedelics through openness to experience to political belief change is , for all practical purposes , negligible .
While data from studies are always paramount , we note that in the first author ’ s experience interacting with hundreds of psilocybin study participants , he does not recall any spontaneous claims of changed political or religious affiliation in either direction .
Our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ data do not suggest that meaningful changes in religious or political beliefs are likely from psychedelic therapy––and certainly not changes in political or religious affiliation .
There is some evidence that psychedelic therapy can prompt changes in one ’ s sense of spirituality , but this term is so broadly and variously defined that it does not even necessarily relate to supernatural beliefs , and it can refer to things like one ’ s values or sense of connection .
As with many interventions , there are cases in which individuals change in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a psychedelic experience .
The frequency and magnitude of these occurrences are empirical questions for future research to address , but the current data simply do not support the idea that psychedelic treatments result in meaningful changes in political or religious beliefs or affiliation .
Psychedelic medicine , like any new treatment , no doubt raises important and challenging ethical issues .
Consent procedures in psychedelic trials by our research group ( and by other groups to our knowledge ) already warn that personality and attitude changes are a possibility .
Of course @ @ @ @ @ @ @ patients if psychedelics are approved as medicine .
Psychedelic experiences are sometimes held as among the most meaningful in one ’ s life , and may be interpreted to have philosophical or spiritual import , likely depending on the orientation of the participant .
Such effects present the opportunity for ethical pitfalls by clinicians .
These and other challenges will call for important contributions from ethicists .
However , we must also be careful to keep any given concern in perspective and convey realistic risks to the public and patients .
From this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the data , that major shifts in political or religious orientation or beliefs are not among the likely risks associated with this treatment .
As psychedelic researchers , we believe it is important to remain vigilant against excesses in enthusiasm as well as alarmism .

Psychedelics are psychoactive substances that historically have attracted exaggerations of benefits as well as alarmism. As with most subjects that bring out extreme views, the scientific data provide a more grounded perspective. Sometimes, the scientific data require further clarification. We are responding to a thought-provoking opinion piece by Eddie Jacobs published on October 11, 2020 entitled “What if a Pill Can Change Your Politics or Religious Beliefs? Some could mistakenly take away from the piece an unrealistic impression that is not supported by the scientific data. We worry that this may lead to alarmist reactions.
Jacobs’ piece raises ethical questions regarding emerging research suggesting psychedelics may be effective psychiatric treatments. Specifically, the concern is that psychedelic therapy could shift patients’ political beliefs “in one direction along the political spectrum” or “change [their] religious beliefs.” We agree that as with any emerging medical treatment, psychedelic therapy prompts important ethical considerations; however, we believe that the possibility implied in the headline––that psychedelics prompt substantial change in political and religious beliefs or affiliations––is not supported by the current scientific data.
To be clear, Jacobs did not mention affiliations, but we believe readers might reasonably take away this interpretation. We suggest that there is no evidence that people change political or religious affiliations from psychedelic treatments, and current evidence for other kinds of belief changes is weak. Below, we address the three major studies mentioned in the original article.
The concern about political beliefs largely rests on evidence from a small pilot study of psilocybin for treating depression. The study showed an average reduction on a measure of “authoritarianism” from baseline to one week after psilocybin in seven people. Authoritarianism, as it is operationalized here using five questions that were reduced from the original version of the scale, likely does not fit neatly into a particular political party. Many people, for example, would likely disagree with the scale item “The law should always be obeyed, even if a particular law is wrong,” regardless of political affiliation.
It is also not clear that a reduction in authoritarianism (or increase in libertarianism or social/moral liberalism, the other end of the scale spectrum) holds a relation to present political affiliations. There are abundant historical examples of both left-wing and right-wing authoritarian governments (for example, communism and fascism, respectively). Moreover, in a country such as the United States, the major left-and right-leaning parties have generally had no universal leaning toward either individual freedom or state control. The position taken along this continuum is highly dependent on the subject (for example, business regulation, abortion, gun control, social constraints on sexual behavior). In fact, the developers of the scale in question preferred not to use the term “liberal” in reference to the scale because that term had a political meaning in the United States that went beyond what the scale measures.
Beyond the theoretical issues with mapping authoritarianism onto present political parties, there are also statistical concerns with this study. The finding about reduced authoritarianism barely met the threshold of significance –– and with a one-tailed t-test. A one-tailed test provides a lower standard for achieving significance compared to the much more common two-tailed test. It is unclear if the reduction would have been significant with a two-tailed test. In any case, the effect did not last. At the 7–12 month follow-up the decrease was not significant, even according to the lower standards of the one-tailed test.
Jacobs’ piece alluded to another study about political beliefs, a 1971 study exploring the association between LSD increased liberalism. This study compared three groups: 1) people who had taken LSD as a medical treatment, 2) people who had taken LSD on their own, and 3) people who had not used LSD. Only those who had taken LSD on their own indicated more support for policies like “individual freedom” and “foreign policy liberalism” compared to those who had not taken LSD.
It is possible that those who were willing to take LSD outside of medical treatment may have already been more influenced by the liberal hippie movement that encouraged these beliefs at that time (Jacobs notes that this is correlational and not causal data). Importantly, no differences were found in this study between the political beliefs of those who received LSD under medical treatment compared to those who did not take LSD. Therefore, this study actually suggests that medical psychedelic treatments do not alter political beliefs!
In terms of religious beliefs, Jacobs’ piece points to a concern about belief change on the basis of a survey study by our group at Johns Hopkins. This survey specifically recruited individuals who had a “God encounter experience” after taking a psychedelic outside of a research context. Before having such an experience during their psychedelic session, 21 percent retrospectively identified as atheist, whereas only 8 percent did after the experience. This decrease was accompanied by a decrease in identification with major religions, alongside increases in spiritual types of self-identification.
Crucially though, this study was in no way representative of the general public, as only people who reported encountering “God” or a similar phenomenon were included in the study. This was a very specific sample of people reporting a special kind of experience or interpretation of experience. The study cannot provide an estimate of population rates. Belief changes of a religious type would, of course, be massively inflated in this sample, and it is therefore not appropriate to draw generalized conclusions about belief change from psychedelic treatments based on these data.
Lastly, the piece cites the observation that under clinical conditions psychedelics increase, on average, a personality trait called openness to experience, a finding first reported by our group at Johns Hopkins and now replicated by others. Unlike the political and religious effects, this phenomenon appears more robust. However, while psychedelics might be unique in their ability to prompt a change in a personality trait with a short-term clinical procedure, they are not the only clinical intervention that can cause changes in personality traits. A large meta-analysis of over 200 published studies examining the effect of psychiatric treatments on personality traits found that personality was indeed changed.
Regardless of whether the intervention was a psychotherapy or a medication such as a traditional antidepressant drug, these changes reached a moderate effect size for increases in the trait of emotional stability, similar to the effect size observed for the increase in personality openness to experience from psilocybin. Lastly, the correlation between openness to experience and liberal political views is small, accounting for only around 2 percent of the relationship between the two variables. In other words, the pathway from psychedelics through openness to experience to political belief change is, for all practical purposes, negligible.
While data from studies are always paramount, we note that in the first author’s experience interacting with hundreds of psilocybin study participants, he does not recall any spontaneous claims of changed political or religious affiliation in either direction.
Our primary point here is that that existing data do not suggest that meaningful changes in religious or political beliefs are likely from psychedelic therapy––and certainly not changes in political or religious affiliation. There is some evidence that psychedelic therapy can prompt changes in one’s sense of spirituality, but this term is so broadly and variously defined that it does not even necessarily relate to supernatural beliefs, and it can refer to things like one’s values or sense of connection.
As with many interventions, there are cases in which individuals change in their values, attitudes and/or beliefs after a psychedelic experience. The frequency and magnitude of these occurrences are empirical questions for future research to address, but the current data simply do not support the idea that psychedelic treatments result in meaningful changes in political or religious beliefs or affiliation.
Psychedelic medicine, like any new treatment, no doubt raises important and challenging ethical issues. Consent procedures in psychedelic trials by our research group (and by other groups to our knowledge) already warn that personality and attitude changes are a possibility. Of course, this should also be done with patients if psychedelics are approved as medicine. Psychedelic experiences are sometimes held as among the most meaningful in one’s life, and may be interpreted to have philosophical or spiritual import, likely depending on the orientation of the participant. Such effects present the opportunity for ethical pitfalls by clinicians.
These and other challenges will call for important contributions from ethicists. However, we must also be careful to keep any given concern in perspective and convey realistic risks to the public and patients. From this perspective, we believe, based on the data, that major shifts in political or religious orientation or beliefs are not among the likely risks associated with this treatment. As psychedelic researchers, we believe it is important to remain vigilant against excesses in enthusiasm as well as alarmism.