It’s a role she knows well.
For more than 11 years, Stoinski has served as president, CEO, and chief scientific officer of the Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund, leading efforts to help the world better understand and protect Rwanda’s mountain gorillas — a species with only about 1,000 left in the wild.
Although she now oversees a multimillion-dollar budget and 400 employees worldwide, she never planned to be a CEO.
“I’m a scientist at my core,” says Stoinski. “Day to day, I function more as a leader and executive, but I still think of myself as a scientist first.”
Her job covers a wide range of responsibilities, including fundraising, public speaking, budgeting, and strategy. One week, she might find herself observing gorilla behavior in Rwanda; the next, she’s back in the U.S., discussing conservation on the popular Armchair Expert podcast.
“I love my job,” she says. “It doesn’t feel like work; it’s a passion.”
One of the reasons Stoinski chose Georgia Tech for her Ph.D. was its connection to Zoo Atlanta.
Her doctoral advisor, the late Terry Maple, emeritus professor in the School of Psychological and Brain Sciences, served as director of Zoo Atlanta, giving students rare access to conservation-focused research.
“The zoo was our lab. I studied elephants, lemurs, gorillas, and golden lion tamarins, both in the zoo and in the wild in Brazil and Africa,” says Stoinski.
She appreciates how Georgia Tech prepared her for the challenges of her career.
“The rigor of a Georgia Tech education is something you need as a scientist,” she says. “I also had the opportunity to do a lot of public speaking and teaching, which are huge parts of my job now.”
After earning her Ph.D., Stoinski spent 14 years with Zoo Atlanta while also working with the Atlanta-based Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund. She became CEO in 2014 and now oversees conservation and research programs in Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Under her leadership, the Fossey Fund has expanded its footprint, including opening its Ellen DeGeneres Campus in 2022, a 12-acre research and education center in Rwanda.
The site includes labs, classrooms, and a restored landscape, where roughly 250,000 plants from 110 species have been planted to reestablish native ecosystems.
“We host hundreds of students — including groups from Georgia Tech, and support dozens of graduate and postdoctoral researchers, from countries all over the world including many from Africa,” she explains. “Seeing their excitement and commitment gives me lots of hope for the future.”
A Gorilla Story follows the Pablo family of mountain gorillas living on the slopes of Volcanoes National Park in northwestern Rwanda.
“The Pablo group goes back to Dian Fossey’s time,” explains Stoinski. “It’s the largest group of gorillas ever recorded, at one point reaching 65 individuals. An average gorilla family is about 10.”
Due to Rwandan regulations, filming could take place for just one hour each day. Filmmakers and scientists would often have to hike for five to six hours to reach the gorillas.
Because Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund researchers have followed these gorilla families for decades, they were already familiar with the individual gorillas, including six generations of family history, which “makes the story incredibly rich,” says Stoinski.
“You see grief, relationships, alliances — all of it,” she says. “Ultimately, I hope that connection leads people to care and to take action.”
Stoinski’s career is all about taking action — and inspiring others to do the same.
“We need people on the ground doing this work, but we also need people outside of our field to support and be aware of what’s happening to gorillas and the planet’s biodiversity,” she says.
She encourages Tech students to stay informed:
“Even if you’re not going into conservation, take a class, listen, learn,” she says. “Unfortunately, there are real challenges facing the next generation.”
She frequently points out that by helping gorillas, we’re saving ourselves, sharing that gorillas live in the Congo Basin, one of the most important ecosystems on Earth. By dispersing seeds and maintaining forest structure, they help sustain environments critical for climate stability and planetary health.
“Protecting gorillas means protecting those ecosystems, which ultimately support human survival.”
Stoinski maintains strong ties to Georgia Tech through research collaborations and student engagement. Projects over the years have included helping to establish the Center for Geographic Information Systems and Remote Sensing at the University of Rwanda, geospatial mapping, and architectural design and planning.
She invites alumni and students to engage with the work firsthand.
“I encourage more Georgia Tech alumni and students to work with us or come see us. And if you want to meet with a Georgia Tech grad, I lead tours: we can put on our Tech gear and take a photo with the gorillas!”
]]>
Housing and transportation are top priorities for many city mayors, policymakers and public policy researchers—including Brian An, an assistant professor at Georgia Tech’s Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter School of Public Policy. But in February 2021, soon after Winter Storm Uri wreaked havoc in Texas, an eight-hour power outage at his Atlanta home became an epiphany.
“While housing stability had long been on my mind, losing power drove home the importance of another piece of urban infrastructure: reliable access to electricity,” says An, an EPIcenter faculty affiliate and co-director of the Center for Urban Research. “It sparked my interest in studying the intersection of energy and urban policy to help make cities and communities not only socially equitable but also resilient to extreme weather.”
Read Full Story on the EPIcenter News Page
]]>Housing and transportation are top priorities for many city mayors, policymakers and public policy researchers—including Brian An, an assistant professor at Georgia Tech’s Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter School of Public Policy. But in February 2021, soon after Winter Storm Uri wreaked havoc in Texas, an eight-hour power outage at his Atlanta home became an epiphany.
“While housing stability had long been on my mind, losing power drove home the importance of another piece of urban infrastructure: reliable access to electricity,” says An, an EPIcenter faculty affiliate and co-director of the Center for Urban Research. “It sparked my interest in studying the intersection of energy and urban policy to help make cities and communities not only socially equitable but also resilient to extreme weather.”
]]>News Contact: Priya Devarajan, Research Communications Program Manager
]]>“Dingjing’s selection for this honor is a remarkable recognition of the originality, impact, and promise of her scholarship,” says School of Psychological and Brain Sciences Chair Tansu Celikel. “This achievement is especially significant for Georgia Tech as she is the first person from the Institute to receive this distinction and only the third recipient from the state of Georgia.”
Shi obtained her Ph.D. in Quantitative Psychology from the University of Virginia in 2020. After working as an assistant professor at the University of Oklahoma, she joined Georgia Tech in 2025.
“Receiving this award is an honor and a responsibility,” says Shi. “This international recognition of my early work encourages me to keep pushing the scientific boundaries of my field and to continue pursuing research that creates meaningful and lasting real-world impacts.”
As a quantitative methodologist, Shi develops statistical and computational models that focus on reducing dimensionality (the number of attributes, features, or independent directions needed to describe an object, dataset, or mathematical space); improving classification; and enabling technology-based, real-time adaptive assessment in psychological, brain, biomedical, and health-related research. Specifically, her research transforms complex brain imaging outputs (such as MRIs and EEGs), real-time ecological assessments, and multi-sensor wearable streams into compact, information-rich representations, and she designs personalized, adaptive intervention systems to deliver context-aware and dynamically updated support for individuals.
Shi’s work has been funded by federal agencies such as the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, the Federal Aviation Administration, and the Department of Homeland Security. She was a recipient of the SAS Institute Advanced Statistical Fellowship as well as the Citation Abstract Award from the Society of Behavioral Medicine.
“I’m excited to work at Georgia Tech in the School of Psychological and Brain Sciences because its strong focus on technology and psychological brain sciences aligns perfectly with my research program,” says Shi. “Being part of such a stimulating academic environment, with outstanding colleagues and talented students, makes it an ideal place to contribute, collaborate, and grow as a researcher and educator.”
]]>Communities across Georgia and the nation are navigating a range of economic and energy-related pressures. Gas prices, inflation, and the rapid growth of data centers are shaping the cost of goods and services, influencing everyday household financial decisions.
At the same time, ongoing geopolitical tensions are driving fluctuations in global oil markets and fuel prices. The expansion of AI data centers is also increasing demand for land, power, and water resources. And conflicts involving energy infrastructure in parts of the Middle East and Europe have affected supply stability.
Responding to these challenges requires careful analysis of emerging trends, supported by strong research in policy and economics. Faculty Affiliates of Georgia Tech’s Energy Policy and Innovation Center study these complex, interconnected issues affecting energy systems, costs, and access. They analyze emerging trends, evaluate policy options, and identify practical pathways forward.
Read Full Story on the EPIcenter News Page
]]>Communities across Georgia and the nation are navigating a range of economic and energy-related pressures. Gas prices, inflation, and the rapid growth of data centers are shaping the cost of goods and services, influencing everyday household financial decisions.
]]>FIFA President Gianni Infantino likened the scale of each game to that of a Super Bowl. The success of a tournament that large will rely heavily on technology, affecting everything from the players on the pitch, all the way to viewers at home.
On top of the state-of-the-art technology used at many large events, this World Cup will also see the debut of new technology. At the center of much of it will be electrical and computer engineering.
Experts from the Georgia Tech School of Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) weigh in on how the field is enabling the technology behind the world’s largest sporting event.
Read Full Story on the ECE News Page
]]>As an energy economist, I am often asked about what contributes to gas prices and what different policies can do to affect them.
The price of a retail gallon of gas is the sum of four things: the cost of crude oil, refining, distribution and marketing, and taxes.
In nationwide figures from January 2026, crude oil accounted for about 51% of the pump price, refining roughly 20%, distribution and marketing about 11% and taxes about 18%. That mix shifts with conditions: When crude oil prices spike, that can drive more than 60% of the price; when the price drops, taxes and logistics are larger shares of the cost.
Because the price of crude oil is the largest element, most of the price at the pump is derived from the global oil market.
Usually, big swings in crude prices come mainly from shifts in global demand and expectations – not from supply disruptions, according to widely cited research in 2009 by the economist Lutz Kilian.
But what is happening in early 2026 with the war in Iran is one of the exceptions: a classic supply shock. Severe disruptions to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz and attacks on Middle East oil infrastructure have taken millions of barrels a day off the global market.
Most drivers generally can’t quickly reduce how much they drive or how much gas they use when prices rise, so gasoline demand doesn’t change much in the short run. That means a jump in crude costs tends to result in people paying more rather than driving less.
Refining turns crude into gasoline at industrial scale. The U.S. doesn’t have a single gasoline market, though. Roughly a quarter of U.S. gasoline is a cleaner-burning blend of petroleum-derived chemicals called “reformulated gasoline,” which is required in urban areas across 17 states and the District of Columbia to reduce smog.
California uses an even stricter formulation that few out-of-state refineries make. California is also geographically isolated: No pipelines bring gasoline in from other U.S. refining regions.
California’s gasoline prices have long run above the national average, explained in part by higher state taxes and stricter environmental rules. But since a refinery fire in Torrance, California, in 2015 reduced production capacity, the state’s prices have been about 20 to 30 cents a gallon higher than what those factors would indicate.
Energy economist and University of California, Berkeley, professor Severin Borenstein has called this the “mystery gasoline surcharge” and attributes it to the fact that there isn’t as much competition between refineries or gas stations in California as in other states. California’s own Division of Petroleum Market Oversight says the surcharge cost the state’s drivers about $59 billion from 2015 to 2024. It’s not exactly clear who is getting that money, but it could be gas stations themselves or refineries, through complex contracts with gas stations.
The distribution and marketing category covers the costs of everything involved in getting the gasoline from the refinery gate to your tank.
Gasoline moves by pipeline, ship, rail and truck to wholesale terminals, and then by local delivery truck to service stations.
At the retailer’s end, the key factors are station rent and labor, the cost to buy gasoline in bulk to be able to sell it, credit card fees of as much as 6 to 10 cents a gallon at current prices, and franchise fees paid to the national brand, such as Sunoco or ExxonMobil, for permission to put their branding on the gas station.
Most gas station operators net only a few cents per gallon on fuel itself – which is why many gas stations are really convenience stores with pumps out front. Borenstein and some of his collaborators have also documented that retail gas prices rise quickly when wholesale costs climb but fall slowly when wholesale costs drop.
The federal government charges a tax on fuel, of 18.4 cents a gallon for gasoline and 24.3 cents a gallon for diesel. States charge their own taxes, ranging from 70.9 cents a gallon for gas in California to 8.95 cents in Alaska.
When gas prices rise, many politicians start talking about temporarily suspending their state’s gas tax. That does reduce prices, but not as much as politicians – or consumers – might hope. Research on past gas tax holidays has found that consumers get about 79% of the reduction in gas taxes. That means oil companies and fuel retailers keep about one-fifth of the tax cut for themselves rather than passing that savings to the public.
Gas tax holidays also reduce funding for what the taxes are designed to pay for, typically roads and bridges. That pushes road and bridge upkeep costs onto future drivers and general taxpayers.
There is an additional problem, too: Taxes on gasoline are supposed to charge drivers for some of the costs their driving imposes on everyone else – carbon emissions, local air pollution, congestion and crashes. But Borenstein has found that U.S. fuel tax levels are already far below the true cost to society. Removing the tax on drivers effectively raises the costs for everyone else.
The 1920 Jones Act is a federal law that requires cargo moving between U.S. ports to travel on vessels built and registered in the U.S., owned by U.S. citizens, and crewed primarily by U.S. citizens and permanent residents. Of the world’s 7,500 oil tankers, only 54 meet this requirement. Only 43 of these can transport refined fuels such as gasoline.
So, despite significant refining capacity on the Gulf Coast, some U.S. gasoline is exported overseas even as the Northeast imports fuel, in part reflecting the relatively high cost of moving fuel between U.S. ports.
Economists Ryan Kellogg and Rich Sweeney estimate that the law raises East Coast gasoline prices by about a penny and a half per gallon on average, costing drivers roughly $770 million a year. In light of the war’s effect on gas prices, the Trump administration has temporarily suspended the Jones Act requirements – an action more commonly taken when hurricanes knock out Gulf Coast refineries and pipeline networks.
The result of all these factors is that the price that drivers see at the pump mostly reflects the global price of crude, plus a stack of domestic costs, only some of which are inefficient.
Tax holidays give a partial, short-lived rebate. Jones Act waivers trim pennies, though permanent repeal may cause more fundamental changes, such as reduced rail and truck transport of all goods, which could lower costs, emissions and infrastructure damage associated with cargo transportation. Harmonizing fuel blends across states and seasons may lower prices somewhat, but likely at the expense of increased emissions.
Ultimately, the best protection against oil price shocks is a more efficient gas-burning vehicle, or one that doesn’t burn gasoline at all. In the meantime, the best I can offer as an economist is clarity about what that $4.30 actually buys.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
]]>Assistant Professor of Economics, Georgia Institute of Technology
Shelley Wunder-Smith
Director of Research Communications
Georgia Institute of Technology
With more than 150 attendees from industry, academia, and research organizations, the event’s high-level engagement underscored the urgency of critical issues facing the energy sector today, including the surging electricity demand, resiliency of the grid, and evolving supply chains, as well as the value of a dedicated space for candid, solutions-oriented dialogue.
“INTERSECT 2026 demonstrated the power of bringing together leaders who are actively shaping the future of energy,” said Laura Taylor, director of EPIcenter. “What began as a forum to explore emerging ideas has grown into a critical platform for aligning perspectives and advancing actionable solutions across the Southeast.”
This year’s program focused on real-world implementation challenges, including managing large-scale load growth and coordinating infrastructure investments to meet demand reliably and affordably. Panels featuring leaders from utilities, global energy corporations, and research organizations emphasized the importance of aligning strategy across sectors to ensure that the Southeast remains competitive and resilient.
Chris Womack, chairman, president, and CEO of Southern Company, delivered the keynote address, highlighting the unprecedented scale of current energy demands.
“Meeting this moment requires us to think differently — serving growth while ensuring reliability, resilience, and long-term value for our customers and communities,” said Womack.
Launched in 2017, the inaugural INTERSECT conference marked the launch of EPIcenter itself and established Georgia Tech’s commitment to connecting research, industry insight, and policy development. It focused on the need to bridge the gap between rapidly advancing technologies and slower-moving regulatory and market frameworks, a theme that continues to shape its mission today.
As INTERSECT 2026 concluded, participants pointed to a shared takeaway: With its industrial base, growing population, and integrated energy systems, the Southeast is uniquely positioned to lead in the next phase of the energy transition. With AI-driven power demand and grid infrastructure playing a significant role going forward, it is imperative to bring together the right voices to shape policies and strategies that will connect ideas to action.
]]>As an energy economist and an international trade economist, we field a lot of questions during such episodes, because when oil prices go up, manufacturers, businesses and ultimately consumers pay more.
Crude oil may be the most important commodity in the global economic system.
It’s a literal fuel for the industrial economy. It powers the engines that drive transportation and paves the roads vehicles drive on. It’s a source for plastics from which the world’s products get made and packaged, and a key ingredient at some point in almost every supply chain. Even fertilizers that boost the food supply are made from it. In short, it is difficult to imagine modern life without oil and its derivatives.
And when its supply changes, its price changes. Economists explain this using a fundamental model of our field: the supply-demand diagram. When there’s less of something to go around, competition among consumers who want it and companies that need it can drive the price up.
Sometimes this process can play out over time, allowing people to adjust their purchasing or activities to dampen price shocks. But when a significant source of the world’s oil is effectively blocked without much advance notice, such as when the the U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz, prices can rise sharply in a short period of time.
A natural question many people ask when oil prices spike is: Where does all that additional money go, and who benefits from it?
Some people have written entire books dissecting all the places that money goes when it leaves consumers’ pockets. But ultimately, the bulk of the money heads in the direction of the source of the oil itself – the oil companies.
What they do with the money varies widely, depending on where in the world an oil company is operating and who owns it. What also matters is the business environment – the set of laws and regulations – in which the company operates.
Oil producers in the Middle East face significant new risk because of the war in Iran, including threats to production, processing locations and shipping routes. These risks raise their costs for insurance, security and transportation.
But production costs in the region are relatively low, so higher global oil prices typically still translate into strong profits.
For a major exporter such as Saudi Arabia, the government owns and controls nearly all oil production, so high prices generally benefit the government’s finances and investments, even during a war. In Saudi Arabia, oil revenue has historically been used to fund public spending.
The Permian Basin, the largest oil field in the U.S., is a long way from the Persian Gulf. When global oil prices rise because of the war in Iran, oil companies operating in West Texas effectively get a windfall gain: Prices rise more quickly than costs, at least in the short run.
The immediate effect is more income from higher prices. The money largely goes to company owners – meaning shareholders – through dividends, debt reduction, company-backed purchases of its own stock, and reinvestment in drilling and production. Over time, companies may decide to spend some of that windfall on building more production capacity or pipelines to get more oil and gas to market.
In the North Sea, between the island of Great Britain and Scandinavia, a mix of multinational and government-owned companies produce most of the oil.
In the U.K., private shareholders are the primary beneficiaries of higher profits from increased oil prices, though an additional tax on oil and gas companies’ profits means the government also collects a significant share of the money, which it uses to help pay public expenses.
In Norway, oil revenues flow into the Government Pension Fund Global, the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund, valued at over $2 trillion. Laws govern how much, and for what purposes, money can be withdrawn from the fund, supporting public spending and preserving wealth for future generations. This is a similar model to Alaska’s state-owned program, funded by oil revenue, that pays for government services and sends an annual dividend to every permanent resident.
Russian oil is subject to stringent economic sanctions imposed by major industrial countries as a response to the Russian invasion and occupation of parts of Ukraine. While the U.S. cannot control how much Russia charges for its oil, it can control services needed to move Russian oil around the world. Under current price sanctions, Western shipping, insurance and financing can be used to ship and sell Russian crude oil only if the price is below $60 per barrel.
Russia’s oil industry is dominated by government-controlled companies whose leaders maintain close ties to President Vladimir Putin. The dealings of those shadowy figures are often shrouded in secrecy, but it is likely that they and Putin’s military-industrial complex – not the Russian people – are the main beneficiaries of high oil prices.
Everyday U.S. consumers may not like the idea of their hard-earned cash going into the already deep pockets of any of these groups. But in the short run, there’s not much to do but pay the price. For the long run, however, people around the world are already thinking and talking about, and opting for, sources of energy that don’t depend on fossil fuels.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
]]>As an energy economist and an international trade economist, we field a lot of questions during such episodes, because when oil prices go up, manufacturers, businesses and ultimately consumers pay more.
Everyday U.S. consumers may not like the idea of their hard-earned cash going into the already deep pockets of any of the oil-producing groups. But in the short run, there’s not much to do but pay the price. For the long run, however, people around the world are already thinking and talking about, and opting for, sources of energy that don’t depend on fossil fuels.
]]>
Matthew E. Oliver
Associate Professor of Economics, Georgia Institute of Technology
Tibor Besedeš
Professor of Economics, Georgia Institute of Technology
Shelley Wunder-Smith
shelley.wunder-smith@research.gatech.edu
Eight faculty members received funding for projects that advance Georgia Tech energy research by generating early insights, expanding shared research tools, and exploring solutions related to energy policy, grid reliability, clean energy incentives, and industry‑driven innovation shaping Georgia’s energy future.
By supporting timely, policy-relevant research and engagement that connect Georgia Tech expertise with pressing regional energy challenges, the ACCELERATE program encourages collaboration across the Institute and with external partners, supports graduate student involvement, and amplifies research outputs that inform policy, regulatory, and market decisions.
“ACCELERATE is designed to help early- and mid-career faculty move quickly on ideas that can shape energy policy and practice,” said Laura Taylor, director of EPIcenter. “By supporting both early‑stage collaboration and more developed policy research, the program enables Georgia Tech researchers to engage decision‑makers and stakeholders when it matters most.”
Proposals considered for funding were grounded in policy and behavioral research, including studies that examined how past or potential policies and regulations worked, and analyses of current market and behavioral outcomes that revealed management, policy, or regulatory gaps and opportunities.
Funded projects span a range of disciplines and policy‑focused topics aligned with EPIcenter’s mission, with a strong emphasis on challenges facing Georgia and the Southeast. Collectively, the awards support research development, data creation, stakeholder engagement, and public-facing thought leadership intended to inform energy policy and implementation.
"As electricity demand grows, it is increasingly important to understand how industrial processes could use energy flexibly to enable efficient use of renewable resources like solar and wind,” said Micah Ziegler, assistant professor in the School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering and the Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter School of Public Policy. “Support from the EPIcenter ACCELERATE program enables us to ask fundamental questions about how to design flexible systems and supply chains."
Awards ranged from $5,000 to $75,000. Projects that received ACCELERATE funding include:
Measuring the Alignment Between Legislators’ Energy Bill Votes and Their District Characteristics in the Georgia House of Representatives
Faculty Researcher: Clio Andris, Associate Professor, School of City and Regional Planning and School of Interactive Computing
Strengthening Georgia Tech’s National Energy Modeling of Priority Research Areas
Faculty Researcher: Marilyn Brown, Regents' Professor and Brook Byers Professor of Sustainable Systems, Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter School of Public Policy
Protecting Consumers From Price Volatility: Evidence and Policy Lessons From Georgia's Natural Gas Market
Faculty Researcher: Dylan Brewer, Assistant Professor, School of Economics
Can Place-Based Incentives Accelerate the Energy Transition?
Faculty Researcher: Gaurav Doshi, Assistant Professor, School of Economics
The Revolving Door in Utility Regulation
Faculty Researcher: Michelle Graff, Assistant Professor, Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter School of Public Policy
How Do Data Centers Affect Tradeoffs Between Reliability and Decarbonization?
Faculty Researchers: Tony Harding, Assistant Professor, Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter School of Public Policy, and Brian An, Assistant Professor, Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter School of Public Policy
Calculating the Emissions Cost of the Solar Rebound for the United States
Faculty Researcher: Matt Oliver, Associate Professor, School of Economics
Evaluating Long-Duration Flexibility of Industrial Demand in Electric Power Systems
Faculty Researchers: Micah Ziegler, assistant professor, School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering and the Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter School of Public Policy, and Constance Crozier, Assistant Professor, H. Milton Stewart School of Industrial and Systems Engineering
ACCELERATE is an annual program open to all Georgia Tech faculty, focusing on policy‑ and decision‑relevant research that advances energy affordability, reliability, resilience, and decarbonization in the region.
More information about EPIcenter’s research areas and programs is available at epicenter.energy.gatech.edu.
]]>Eight faculty members received funding for projects that advance Georgia Tech energy research by generating early insights, expanding shared research tools, and exploring solutions related to energy policy, grid reliability, clean energy incentives, and industry‑driven innovation shaping Georgia’s energy future.
]]>EPIcenter ACCELERATE Program Recipients: Top (Left to Right) - Clio Andris, Marilyn Brown, Dylan Brewer, Gaurav Doshi, Michelle Graff; Bottom (Left to Right) - Tony Harding, Brian An, Matt Oliver, Micah Ziegler, Constance Crozier
Artificial intelligence has been touted as the most transformative technology of our time. With only a few years of mainstream use, it’s changed how we work and communicate, generated billions of dollars in investments, and sparked global debate. But according to leading neuroethics expert Karen Rommelfanger, the race isn’t over yet.
“Can you think of a more transformative technology than one that intervenes with the fundamental organ that drives your experience in the world?”
That fundamental organ is the brain.
Technologies interfacing directly with the brain have been reserved for treating severe injury or disease for decades. Now, neurotechnology is expanding into brain-responsive wearables meant to enhance, augment, and monitor everyday life. As these technologies accelerate and AI is incorporated, the question is no longer if neurotechnology will transform society, but how — and who will shape the boundaries.
These are some of the questions on which Karen Rommelfanger has built her career. Trained as a biomedical researcher and neuroscientist, Rommelfanger went on to found the Institute for Neuroethics, the world’s first think and do tank devoted entirely to neuroethics, public engagement, and policy implementation.
“The brain is special; it’s central to who we are,” says Rommelfanger, who was also an inaugural recipient of the Dana Foundation Neuroscience and Society Award. “And that means when you intervene with the brain, there are unique responsibilities. The field of neuroethics addresses things like: How do you ensure mental privacy? How do you protect free will? How do you ensure that people have the power to be narrators of their own lives and their cognitive experience?”
Now, Rommelfanger is joining Georgia Tech’s Institute for Neuroscience, Neurotechnology, and Society (INNS) as a professor of the practice, where she will work to further embed neuroethics into Georgia Tech’s research and technology development ecosystem.
“Georgia Tech is producing the next generation of neurotechnologists, and Karen’s expertise will help ensure we’re preparing them to think about societal impact as deeply as they think about the technical and scientific aspects of their work,” says Christopher Rozell, executive director of INNS. “Her leadership strengthens the Institute in exactly the way this moment in neurotechnology demands.”
“Georgia Tech has many, many ways that it leads in the technology ecosystem. But one of the powerful, unique ways it can lead is through neurotechnology,” says Rommelfanger. “I hope that the INNS, given its unique mandate for neuroscience, neurotechnology, and society, can be a lighthouse for these types of conversations.”
From institutional review boards to mandatory responsible research conduct training, ethics are a foundational part of scientific research. But designing neurotechnologies raises ethical challenges beyond the scope of typical training. What happens when discoveries leave the lab and enter people’s lives?
That question sits at the core of Rommelfanger’s work. She argues it’s a neurotechnologist’s responsibility to recognize and proactively address the need for unique safeguards for privacy, autonomy, and long-term responsibility. Her solution is to move neuroethics upstream, embedding it directly into the research, design, and deployment of neurotechnology through an approach she calls “neuroethics by design.”
“Neuroethics by design considers ethics as a core criterion where principles can drive innovation with more of a lens toward societal outcomes,” she says — an approach informed by years of advising national-level brain research initiatives and her experience at the intersection of clinical practice and ethics scholarship.
Rather than treating ethics as a compliance checklist or a post hoc review, neuroethics by design integrates ethical thinking throughout the entire innovation lifecycle, from early ideation and research questions to product requirements, governance strategies, and long-term sustainability. She has used the approach for years as an embedded partner for neurotechnology startups in her neuroethics consultancy, Ningen Co-Lab.
After decades as a traditional academic professor and then years advising companies and policymakers with this philosophy, Rommelfanger says Georgia Tech is the right place to scale this work. With its strength in neurotechnology and INNS’s rare focus on neuroscience and society, “I could not think of a better place to launch and pilot this neuroethics by design scaling effort.”
She will work with INNS to help equip researchers, students, and industry partners with practical tools for ethical decision-making. Her vision is not to create neuroethicists as a standalone profession, but to cultivate ethically engaged neurotechnologists and engineers.
Central to her plans at INNS are hands-on training programs that bring ethics out of the abstract and into practice. “I wanted to be a professor of the practice because, while the field does need more scholars, what it really needs most at this point are practitioners.”
Rommelfanger is exploring modular content that can be embedded into existing courses across disciplines, as well as immersive training — such as neuroethics boot camps and problem-solving hackathons — that bring together students, faculty, and professionals to tackle real-world challenges collaboratively.
“No one discipline can solve all the ethical challenges ahead,” says Rommelfanger. She is particularly interested in creating spaces where experts from across science and engineering, policy and law, design and the arts, and philosophy can work side by side with people with lived experience of neurological conditions. “The onus is not on scientists alone, but is a shared responsibility that benefits immensely from dialogue, accountability, and action across diverse communities.”
By situating neuroethics within Georgia Tech’s broader research ecosystem, Rommelfanger hopes INNS can help shift how the field evolves globally.
“It's really difficult to get your arms around something once it's out of the gate,” she says, citing the rapid adoption of AI without proper ethical or policy guidelines. “With neurotechnology, we still have a little bit of time, but not that much time. We are at that moment where we could change the course of global history.”
On April 2, Georgia Tech launched its new Institute for Technology and Civic Leadership with a symposium built around a simple idea. Society benefits when people are willing to listen, especially to those who disagree with them.
“The Institute will serve as a space to share ideas, learn from one another, and discover common ground,” said Amanda Murdie, dean of the Ivan Allen College of Liberal Arts.
“This is especially important in a moment when technology is rapidly altering how we encounter information, form beliefs, and relate to one another.”
“The Institute creates opportunities for students to examine the civic and social implications of technological innovation,” said Aaron Levine, associate dean for research and outreach in the Ivan Allen College of Liberal Arts and interim executive director of the Institute for Technology and Civic Leadership.
“It will support leaders who can approach difficult questions thoughtfully, drawing on evidence, expertise, and an understanding of diverse perspectives.”
That focus was reflected in the symposium’s keynote dialogue between Robert George and Cornel West, eminent scholars, longtime friends, and coauthors of Truth Matters: A Dialogue on Fruitful Disagreement in an Age of Division.
The keynote conversation modeled the kind of thoughtful dialogue across deep differences that the new Institute aims to cultivate. George and West do not expect to change each other’s minds.For them, persuasion isn’t the point.
“We don’t often completely change each other’s minds about things, but that’s not the goal,” said George, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University.
“You can have 100% agreement and be wrong. My goal isn’t to persuade him, but to learn what I can from him.”
Listening with care and humility to someone who is coming from a very different place, George added, can offer new ways of seeing an issue.
For West, that process begins with resisting easy labels.
“We don’t look at the world through the lens of -isms,” said West, who is the Dietrich Bonhoeffer Chair at Union Theological Seminary.
“You try to listen to a particular argument, put forward by a specific person, and to stay in contact with their humanity. Embrace their humanity.”
The two-day event also included panel discussions featuring insights from peer institutions and breakout sessions inviting the campus community to contribute feedback and ideas about the new institute.
The new Institute aims to give students the chance to explore a broad range of ideas about how innovation shapes communities, the economy, and public life. It aims to be a place where people can exchange ideas freely, learn from one another and find common ground — all anchored in open debate, scientific inquiry and evidence-based problem-solving.
It will also serve as a hub for bringing together leaders from government, industry, academia and other sectors to tackle pressing challenges and pursue science- and data-driven solutions.
The paper examines various strategies for enhancing the flexibility of data center energy use. One approach is to use backup power systems, such as uninterruptible power supplies, to support the grid during emergencies. Another method involves rerouting computing jobs to different data centers in other locations to balance energy demand. The authors also discuss implementing smart scheduling techniques that shift workloads to off-peak hours, reducing strain on the grid. Additionally, they highlight adjusting processor speeds by lowering CPU (central processing unit) and GPU (graphics processing unit) clock rates to limit power consumption when needed. Finally, the paper suggests pre-cooling data center equipment to limit the energy required for cooling during peak demand periods. Notably, experimental evidence shows that underclocking GPUs can cut power consumption by 40% with only a 22% performance loss, suggesting technical feasibility for demand-response interventions.
Despite these technical options, the authors find that real-world cost considerations and reliability concerns limit widespread adoption. Data center operators generally do not change their behavior in response to electricity prices, as job revenue far outweighs energy costs under normal conditions. For example, a GPU rented at $2 per hour consumes only $0.04 worth of electricity at average prices, making curtailment unattractive except during extreme price spikes. Surveys indicate that operators are reluctant to compromise reliability or deploy backup systems for ancillary services. Consequently, price-based incentives alone are unlikely to drive meaningful flexibility.
Read more on the EPIcenter Webpage
Listen to a podcast on the research here
As new data centers continue to be built and proposed in Georgia, counties and municipalities across the state are considering how to guide this growth. EPIcenter’s data center dashboard provides policymakers, planners, researchers, and community stakeholders with a centralized resource to better understand how data center regulations are being developed and applied across Georgia and the U.S.
“Our Data Center Hub provides Georgia communities with a one-stop shop to understand how their neighbors are managing land-use regulations for data centers,” said Laura Taylor, director of EPIcenter. “It brings together clear, accessible information to help jurisdictions plan when data center growth occurs in their area.”
The dashboard is organized around five thematic areas commonly addressed in data center land-use regulations: Site Planning and Building Design, Infrastructure and Utilities, Environmental and Community Protections, Public Safety and Security, and Lifecycle Governance. Within each theme, users can explore specific regulatory topics and access the relevant ordinances enacted by Georgia communities.
To build the dashboard, EPIcenter researchers conducted a comprehensive review of municipal codes across the state.
“We reviewed municipal codes for about 180 cities and counties across Georgia and identified ordinances that specifically address data center development,” said Yang You, EPIcenter’s research associate who developed the project. “In total, we found 19 data center-specific topics that ordinances tend to cover. We analyzed ordinances across jurisdictions and organized their ordinance provisions into topics such as building placement, setbacks, infrastructure, and environmental considerations to make it easier to compare how different jurisdictions regulate data centers.”
You added that the dashboard also incorporates examples from outside of Georgia. By gathering ordinances from other states and pairing them with Georgia-specific examples, EPIcenter aims to provide a clear framework to help communities efficiently address data center land-use regulation.
The Georgia Data Center Ordinance Hub is available through the Energy Policy and Innovation Center website.
]]>
As new data centers continue to be built and proposed in Georgia, counties and municipalities across the state are considering how to guide this growth. EPIcenter’s data center dashboard provides policymakers, planners, researchers, and community stakeholders with a centralized resource to better understand how data center regulations are being developed and applied across Georgia and the U.S.
“Our Data Center Hub provides Georgia communities with a one-stop shop to understand how their neighbors are managing land-use regulations for data centers,” said Laura Taylor, director of EPIcenter. “It brings together clear, accessible information to help jurisdictions plan when data center growth occurs in their area.”
]]>