Meet Rodrigo Araiza Bravo, Congressional Science and Technology Policy Fellow

Meet Rodrigo Araiza Bravo, PhD, an alumni of the Yelin group at Harvard beginning his public service career as an American Institute of Physics Congressional Science and Technology Policy Fellow in Washington, D.C. 

May 23, 2025

Could you introduce yourself, where you're from, where you're living and working now?

RAB: Yeah, of course. I'm Rodrigo, I am from Mexico City. I moved to the U.S. when I was about 16, and I lived in Chicago for a number of years. I went to the University of Illinois and then I did my PhD in physics at Harvard. I graduated in 2024, and now I am Congressional Science and Technology Policy Fellow serving at the U.S. Congress, giving advice to members of Congress on issues related to science, energy, and the environment.

So what does your day-to-day look like as a policy fellow?

RAB: My days vary a lot. Usually, it's being in the office, being on the Hill, helping out with whatever is going on in my space. Helping out with any policy issues that come up within science, energy, and environment, STEM education, STEM workforce, particularly if my expertise can be leveraged in any kind of way.

My expertise is in quantum information science, quantum computing, and related topics. If there is any piece of legislation that has to do with quantum or that talks about science funding, I’m lending out my expertise. That means putting together reports, reading policy opinion pieces or reports, and synthesizing them in a way that can be translated to people on the Hill to be able to read them so they can make an informed decision.

As an expert, how would you say that quantum technologies affect people who aren't quantum researchers or working in quantum industries? Is there anything that you wish the general public knew about quantum technology or anything related to your policymaking?

RAB: Yeah, absolutely. Whenever somebody asks, “why is quantum computing important,” we should start by saying quantum computing is important because it can help us. For example, it can help us with chemical manufacturing, which could be used for drug discovery, or for creating certain kinds of molecules that we can use for things like protecting the environment, or cleaning up environmental messes that we've made in the past. It can also help us with manufacturing better materials that can be used for more efficient traveling, [or] for coming up with solutions to engineering problems. 

It could also be used for a variety of different things. One application of a fully-fleshed quantum computer is that it could also break our current encryption that we use for everyday transactions. That means that it's a so-called ‘dual-use’ technology; it can be used for nefarious purposes or beneficial purposes to the community. So, when we are developing, we need to think holistically about the impacts of our research.

We should also say that quantum computers are still in the research and development phase. They don't yet exist out there with full capabilities that would allow for this many applications to be realized So, as we are moving through the process of making them come to reality, we need not only funding, but also, to make sure that we're training enough people, and training the talent that we need to design these machines. That talent could be domestic, [and] it also has a large international angle to it.

We also need to keep dialogue with other countries, right? If this thing can be used for bad things or for good things, we want to make sure that we are making each other aware of where we are in that process and making sure that we're not gonna harm each other.

Are there any other aspects of science or policy, besides quantum issues, that you've learned about since starting your job? What's it been like for you to think about non-quantum aspects of STEM?

RAB: Yeah absolutely! When on the job, I like to learn about new things. One area that I've been trying to become more knowledgeable about is PFAS. PFAS, or what I call “forever chemicals,” are a large class of molecules with many uses characterized by strong carbon-fluorine bonds. 

They're used in a variety of different applications: to make things stain-resistant, fire-resistant, waterproof. So, for example, Teflon is a PFAS, but there are many other PFASs, like PFOA, [which]  is used for putting out fires. It's basically like a foam, and it's really good at putting out fires. 

The reason why this is important is because PFAS are highly pollutant. They can accumulate in the air, in the water, in the soil, and they can also bioaccumulate. They can accumulate in humans' bodies. And they have been found to actually … increase the likelihood of somebody having cancer or problems with their thyroid.

Using my kind of physics-y brain, understanding that the CF bond is one of the strongest bonds out there, helps me understand why they're so “forever,” in the forever chemical sense, why they bioaccumulate, why they're in the body… Using that, I can think … “Okay, so we really need to do something about this. What do we do about it?” Thankfully, my office has been leading on trying to create policy around  PFAS remediation and destruction.

It's been a lot of fun to learn new things. That's one example, but I've also learned a lot about STEM education, STEM workforce, lead pipes and lead paint, and the existence thereof, particularly Illinois has a big problem with it.

You learn new things. You learn new skills. I've learned so much about our trade deficit in the agricultural space, the energy usage of AI, the energy usage of quantum computing. It's a lot of fun, and you're able to explore many different angles.

When did your interests in science and public policy start? How did you know that this was a career that you wanted to do?

RAB: My interest in science started pretty early on. I would say when I was, like, 8 or 9. My grandfather was a chemical engineer. I just remember that we went to tour a tequila factory outside of Mexico City while I was in Jalisco, where he's from. I was so interested in the process of distillation, and I just started asking him about it, and that was the first time that I really was interested in science in general. I continued learning more and then in college, I became really enamored with physics.

For policy, it was definitely when I was in grad school. I participated [in] organizing for the grad student union at Harvard, and that provided me with a lot of ways to understand and think about how science doesn't happen in a vacuum, right? Science is people. And science is made by people. I wanted to ensure that scientists like yourself and like myself had the best time possible, so that we can do the best science possible.

Whether that was through, you know, making sure that our contract was enforced, the people were getting paid, [or] the people had nice chairs to sit on when they were in their office. I started realizing that my role was very much being one of those people who is very interested in science, sees the value of it, and is willing to go out of their way to help those people making the science and move it forward. 

After that, I started engaging a lot with the science policy group here at Harvard, started engaging with scholars in Science and Technology Studies, which is a brand of descriptive social sciences that thinks about science as a human endeavor. Because it's made by people, it's also very much subject to, and even perpetuates, power structures. We need to think very carefully about … the power structures that are embedded in the science, right? The fact that we can send an email across the world and it's read by two computers means there is some notion that knowledge should be universal, and it should be freely translated.

So I started thinking a lot about that, and I realized that one way for me to kind of apply those more philosophical ideas that I had was to be in policy, thinking about how we are moving forward … through making decisions for each other, right?

Could you share more about how you found your current position?

RAB: I knew about science policy as a career pretty much the second year of grad school because I just was like, “I don't know if I want to do a postdoc. I wonder what else is out there.” I knew that there was something like these fellowships that you do after you finish your PhD, and you can spend one year in Congress, [or] you can spend two years in the executive branch, but I really didn't pay too much attention to it. It was really through networking, meeting people who had done the fellowship, who told me about how impactful it was in their lives, how satisfied they felt with themselves by helping out, that I really started taking it more seriously.

Then I went to a conference [in] my fourth year of grad school, where they talked a lot about the fellowships, and there were some fellows in the crowd, so I think that that's the thing that really got me thinking that I should apply. 

You apply a year before the fellowship starts, and it's a lengthy process. They interview you a couple of times. The fellowship has been a really rewarding experience.

What are you doing after your fellowship ends?

RAB: I will continue in the public sector, and particular, in science policy. I'm moving to the state-level, going back to my home state of Illinois and helping out with quantum computing efforts at the state level. It's really nice to be continuing through public service. I love public service. I think that that's where I fit very well, but it's also nice to leverage all the expertise that I have, build on that, and build new expertise.

Do you have any career advice for our readers?

RAB: One of the biggest takeaways that I've had from my experience is that, oftentimes, we think that there are set ways to do things, right? When I came into grad school, I was told… “You'll go to college, then you go to grad school, and then you go and do a postdoc, then you become a professor, and that's it.” And very early on, even in college, I realized that that path wasn't for me. But I didn't know what else I wanted to do. I just knew that I didn't want to do that.

And so, I spent a lot of time in college and grad school exploring what fits me, and I've always kind of tried to follow my intuition. If I find something interesting, and if I want to help somewhere, then I just go and do it. I've surrounded myself with people, like my PhD advisor, my mentors, who value me as a human being, rather than just as a researcher or scientist. That means that sometimes when I'm like, “hey, I would love to do more of the science, but I'm also going to do this other thing that I think is very important.” They were always like, “Go do that. You should go do that and help out.” 

Finding those people who are really going to support you, finding what really motivates you, makes you go to work every day, and satisfies you. It's very important, even if that doesn't fit the mold. The mold is there to be broken.

The other piece of advice would be just to stay curious, and stay curious about many things. If you're somebody who's like, “I just want to dive very deep into one single topic,” that's great and I love that for you. But if you are like, “huh, I want to learn about more things,” go do it, because it's very valuable.

I meet a lot of people that tell me, “Oh my god, you have a very particular set of skills, because you know so much about many things, and have soft skills that traditional scientists wouldn't have.” It's not because I was like “I'm going to learn things that nobody else does.” No, it's because it just followed my heart. So, do that.

Is there anything else you want to share?

RAB: For those who are in high school, I did take some science classes when I was in high school. I really thought that I wanted to be a chemist. Lo and behold, I'm not a chemist. So… I think something that helped me in that period of time was also doing a bunch of extracurricular activities. For example, I was in theater, I was in show choir. That allowed me to relax a little bit, and gather up my breath, and then do the science as well during the day, or in the evening sometimes, also just through my homework or AP classes. 

Another thing that I did was, once I started college, I actually started at the community college level. That was useful, because for me, as somebody who has–as you can tell–a pretty wide range of interest, I could switch in and out of them. I took some chemistry classes my first semester, and I realized that's not it. Then I took some math classes, very abstract math, and I was like, that is also not it.

Eventually, I sloshed around physics, right? [Editor’s note, Rodrigo made a harmonic oscillator motion with his hand here in the interview.] It cost me not that much money… and it gave me a lot of that freedom.

I know that sometimes we think of community colleges like a fallback option, but they are also an opportunity to experiment. If you are not sure about where you want to go or what you want to do, community college is a good place to land and figure it out.