In Energy and the Environment We Need To Call ‘Em Like We See ‘Em
Frequent commenter MarcoPolo suggests that I become less doctrinaire (my word, not his) in my writing. He points out: That’s the problem with wanting to ‘win’ an argument. Such claims may find acceptance with your own congregation of the converted, but only increase resentment and alienation with opponents, while those in the middle remain skeptical of both sides.
You have a point there. But check out this part of my email signature that I use sometimes: “I won’t be the dad who knew, but did nothing about it.” Translation: My integrity commands that I do my best to communicate what I know to be the truth about energy and the environment.
Also, you should note that an ever-growing number of “those in the middle” are gravitating towards environmentalism. Obviously, I influence a relatively small audience, but what I’m doing is most definitely not fruitless.
Craig,
I think that most of us agree about the seriousness of global warming. Where we often disagree is exactly how to eliminate CO2 emissions from power generation systems.
Craig,
There is nothing wrong with your basic message, hopefully it’s a message we all share. Please be assured we all admire and respect your efforts and convictions.
But why risk detracting, confusing and alienating with unnecessary political and ideological doctrines that limit the effectiveness of your main message ?
By your own admission, there’s an enormous global ground swell toward populists like Donald Trump. Why?
Any environmentalist advocate who can’t accept that their rhetoric might be responsible is deluding themselves !
Surely, even the most ardent activist must understand that to become more effective, the environment message must have more to do with the environment and less to do with sensationalist claims, exaggerations, alarmist doom saying, leftist opportunism, conspiracy theories and other extraneous nonsense ?
Craig, we’re not your enemies ! In fact we are your allies. Advocates are salespeople. When we tell you that your presentation may not as effective as it could be, we do so from respect and a desire to help.
Would it be so difficult to lose that small portion of your presentation which alienates potential supporters ? Isn’t it more important to tailor your presentation to make the message more effective, instead of just preaching to the converted ?
As you know, I am the principle financier and business strategist for a smallish company that builds, sells and maintains specialist EV’s in Australia. Australia offers no government support for EV’s, not even for EV infrastructure. The EV business is considered a loser in Australia. Even long established fork lift companies prefer to sell H20 or LPG units.
Yet for 19 years we’ve stayed successfully in business. Over the years, I’ve watched many idealistically motivated, well funded, even government sponsored, EV /”Green” businesses start and fold.
The EV business is a relatively small operation in comparison to my my business activities, but it’s a business close to my heart, since I became involved at the behest of my late wife.
So why are we still in business when others failed ? I believe it’s because we focus on the prime objective and refrain from subjecting clients to our ideological convictions, politics, or other extraneous distractions.
We listen carefully to our clients needs, expectations and desires. It’s all about their emotions, not ours ! We’ve learned to sound moderate, trustworthy, and focused on the benefits to our customers, not revelling in our own propaganda.
We learned that preaching and business don’t mix. We stick to our core message, without impassioned tirades against our opponents. In this way, we slowly gain interest in our philosophy.
By remaining focused on finding common ground we agree on, we find the “clean tech” message isn’t so hard to sell. Once we concentrate on the benefits to the customer from clean tech and avoidi controversial ideologies or politics, we not only sell “green” clean tech products, but arouse interest in environmental progress.
Last week my bank hosted a conference in London for major clients from the USA to discus the implications of Brexit. Among the Americans were several affiliated with the GOP in senior capacities.
One US client asked me why we replaced the BMW 7 series courtesy car that met him at Heathrow on his last visit, with a Tesla model S.
I could have taken the occasion to rant on about the environment, GOP bastards, the Koch bros, Oil company conspiracies etc, but I felt that may not have gained a warm reception in this son of Texas 🙂 !
Instead I told him of the advantages. I spoke of lower maintenance and greater reliability, how such a vehicle was not only cheaper to buy and operate in a city with heavy congestion charges, but improved our image with younger clients and employees. I told him of the tax advantages etc.
After asking his opinion of what he thought about the cars comfort and technology, he relaxed and asked me whether it was in response to climate change issues.
I replied AWG/CC wasn’t really much of a consideration, but in a city the size of London lessening pollution can’t be a bad thing. I pointed out the Tesla was especially popular with young ladies who thought it a very cool car !
Several of the Americans became intrigued with our conversation and joined our conversation. I could tell the merits of Tesla and it’s technology had increased in their estimation.
I relate this episode merely to illustrate how by focusing on clean tech benefit, even the most antagonistic skeptic can become a little more open minded.(That becomes the chink in the Armour!)
The gentleman in question influences the purchasing decisions involving hundreds of billions of corporate dollars annually. Who knows, just a little favorable “green” consciousness from such individuals could potentially make a real difference.
But that’s just my take on the best way to “spread the word ” 🙂
Cheers..