Iván García Kerdan on Engineering and Climate Policy

Iván García Kerdan is a systems engineer and 2026 Climate Fellow at Yale University. Trained in mechatronics and energy systems at the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, he works at the intersection of engineering and climate governance. The Yale Clean Energy Forum spoke with García Kerdan about energy systems modeling, sustainable construction materials in Mexico, and how technical feasibility interacts with policy and governance.

The first time Iván García Kerdan began to see energy as more than a technical problem, he was still firmly rooted in engineering. As an undergraduate in mechatronics at the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, he was trained to think through control systems, automation, and precision. His early professional work reflected that training. He worked in robotics and building automation and programming systems to reduce energy consumption. Energy efficiency, at that stage, meant optimizing performance. A building used too much electricity, so you recalibrated. A system underperformed, so you refined the code. The boundaries of the problem were clear.

Energy widened in scope during his master’s in energy systems. One of his professors was Claudia Sheinbaum, then a physicist teaching energy modeling. Iván recalls her as the first professor in his academic life who approached the field in a deliberately multidisciplinary way. Technical modeling was never isolated from policy. Energy systems were discussed alongside governance and social priorities. The equations did not disappear. What changed was the context in which they operated.

He continued that trajectory in the United Kingdom, where he completed a PhD in energy engineering at University College London and later a postdoctoral fellowship in energy systems at Imperial College. In London, he joined a multidisciplinary research group that brought together technical modeling with social science perspectives. His work on green buildings focused not only on minimizing energy consumption through design, but on understanding how human behavior affects performance. Buildings could be optimized in theory, yet the way occupants used them altered outcomes in practice.

In describing this period, Iván returned repeatedly to assumptions, which energy system models require. Engineers simulate future scenarios by making projections about economic growth, population change, and technological uptake. Over time, he became interested in the fact that these projections go beyond engineering. They depend on political decisions, geopolitical shifts, and social trends. Rather than treating those as external to the model, he began looking for ways to integrate them, while remaining clear about disciplinary limits. He emphasized that social science cannot be reduced to a variable inserted into an equation. Engineers, he notes, sometimes assume they can move seamlessly into other fields. In his own work, he prefers collaboration. Psychologists, policy scholars, and economists contribute expertise that he does not claim. For him, being multidisciplinary is less about mastering every field than about recognizing where one field ends.

When he returned to Mexico City several years ago to teach and lead within the engineering school at Tecnológico de Monterrey, he brought that approach with him. He observed that in Mexico, multidisciplinary research is still less common than in parts of the Global North. Academic silos remain strong. Part of his work now involves encouraging collaboration across schools and fields, not as an abstract ideal but as a practical necessity for addressing energy and climate challenges.

That perspective is evident in his recent publication on optimizing large scale solar based distributed energy generation in high density urban areas. The study combines geospatial analysis with techno economic modeling to evaluate rooftop solar potential. Technically speaking, the case for distributed solar is increasingly strong since costs have declined, the technology is mature, and increased data is available. Yet large scale adoption remains uneven. When asked about the primary constraint on scaling rooftop solar in dense cities, Iván did not reduce the issue to a single technical bottleneck. From his perspective in Mexico and across much of the Global South, income is central. For many households, energy technologies compete with more immediate expenditures. Climate and energy, he explained, are not always the primary focus when basic needs and household improvements take precedence.

Education represents a second constraint. He pointed to limited familiarity with concepts such as return on investment and long-term savings. Even where households might afford installation, the financial logic of distributed generation is not always widely understood. At the same time, generational dynamics complicate adoption. Younger people may be interested in these technologies, but increasingly face barriers to property ownership. Without ownership, installing rooftop systems becomes structurally difficult.

Policy instability forms a third barrier. Mexico previously had mechanisms that allowed households to sell electricity generated by rooftop solar back to the grid. Subsequent policy changes curtailed those incentives. Projects slowed. For Iván, the issue is not only the quality of policy design, but its continuity. Even a modest policy, he argued, can be effective if it remains in place long enough to create confidence. In political contexts where priorities shift frequently, that continuity is hard to sustain.

He illustrated the complexity of policy design through the example of air quality regulation in Mexico City. On days of severe pollution, certain vehicles are restricted from circulation based on license plate numbers. The policy aims to reduce emissions. In practice, some households respond by purchasing additional vehicles to maintain mobility. For him, the results reinforce the same pattern he sees elsewhere. Environmental interventions operate within social and economic systems. Without accounting for those systems, policies may produce unintended effects.

His experience as a Climate Fellow at Yale has further sharpened this awareness. Iván describes the cohort as distinct from an academic group. Participants brought practical experience and were willing to question assumptions directly, including those of Yale faculty. For him, this environment was instructive. Academic research often assumes stable policy environments and coherent institutional incentives. During cohort discussions, conversations were rooted in electoral timelines, budget negotiations, and the practical realities of implementation. Fellows raised critiques in real time. Professors responded in equally direct terms. The exchange expanded his perspective on how climate solutions are debated and contested outside academic settings.

That shift is already influencing his current research on sustainable construction materials in Mexico. With government support, his team is studying alternatives to conventional concrete blocks widely used in housing, which carry significant embodied carbon due to energy intensive production. One material under investigation incorporates sargassum seaweed, which has accumulated in large quantities along Mexico’s Caribbean coast, disrupting coastal ecosystems and tourism economies. The research moves from life cycle assessment to laboratory testing of thermal conductivity and structural performance, with particular attention to seismic requirements in Mexico City. If the lab results hold, the team would move toward building and testing a full scale prototype. But the question is not just whether the material performs. It sits within a larger set of pressures, from coastal sargassum accumulation to housing demand and urban emissions. Choosing a building material, in this context, carries environmental and economic implications beyond the structure itself.

Across our conversation, a consistent thread runs through his work. He has not left engineering behind. Modeling, simulation, and measurement remain central. What has changed is the frame. Energy systems are shaped by political cycles, housing markets, educational access, and financial constraints as much as by thermodynamics. In the Global South, he argues, technical viability alone does not determine adoption. Infrastructure is built within specific institutional conditions. His path from automation engineer to Climate Fellow reflects that recognition. The tools of engineering remain, but the scope of what they must account for has widened.

Disclosure: This piece is based on a live interview with Iván García Kerdan. Portions of the conversation were summarized, but all ideas and perspectives reflect Iván’s original responses.