I decided to take the train to Los Angeles this morning, rather than driving. Even though this takes a bit longer, it has numerous benefits: I certainly did right by the world by not using the gas, and I was able to work the whole time; it’s really a very pleasant, safe, low-anxiety way to travel. I probably even saved a few dollars, when you consider all the costs in driving.
I’m here to test drive a Tesla and hang out with 2GreenEnergy Associate Terry Ribb, who’s been a close friend for almost 30 years. Terry was one of my first clients; she’s brilliant, life-affirming, and infinitely valuable as a sounding board for business ideas.
More of the test drive soon; I’m looking forward to zipping around the streets here.
I’ve spent the last couple of days editing the transcripts of the interviews I’ve conducted for my next book. Although this is tedious work, it gives me the opportunity to relive some moments I’ve greatly enjoyed, and re-absorb some of the fantastic thoughts that these incredible people have laid at my feet.
This process has also reminded me that I need a title and a theme that fits the content of the new book, not unlike “Facts and Fantasies” and “Tough Realities” fit the last one.
The book is really a deeper exploration of the so-called “Tough Realities.” If this is something our society has to do, why is it taking so long? Why is the US lagging the rest of the world in implementation? Are there large, powerful political and economic forces that conspire against it? What does our future look like, and why?
If you wouldn’t mind helping, please let me know which of the titles below you most favor:
Renewable Energy — How Do We Get There from Here?
Renewable Energy — Versus the Powers That Be
Renewable Energy — Can the Good Guys Win One?
Renewable Energy and the Big Money We Wish Were Behind It
Renewable Energy — The Tough Realities of Technology, Economics, and Politics
Renewable Energy — Why the US Is Walking Away from the Challenge of the Century
Also, if you have any original suggestions on the subject, please add them as well. Thanks very much.
I try not to comment on political issues that have no direct bearing on clean energy, or sustainability more generally. Having said that, I have indeed taken up the mantle of MoveToAmend.org, in its fight to overturn corporations’ recently granted rights to spend as much as they wish to influence our elections. The tragic US Supreme Court decision granting this right, Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission, is, in my mind, the single most important, and, in this case, disastrous opinion to come from the High Court in more than 150 years (Dred Scott, 1857).
At least Romney had the decency to tell us where he stood. As the MoveToAmend people put it, “He’s taking a lot of flak for it, but we want to thank Mitt for being honest about his true loyalties in a time when so many politicians are trying to hide the truth. Americans deserve to know where candidates stand on the illegitimate doctrine of Corporate Personhood.”
France has outlawed hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, a technique for extracting natural gas and oil. French senators voted the measure through on July 2nd, after much hoopla this year. As BusinessWeek reported on April 4th 2011, Jose Bove, a French environmental activist, Green Party deputy and onetime Presidential candidate, brought the idea of fracking in France to a halt first. Energy companies were beginning to prepare for oil & gas search (by use of fracking) in hard rock of southern France, but on January 22nd, Bove started a petition against fracking. Within weeks, the government ordered a moratorium and by March 11th, the Prime Minister extended the bank to June. (more…)
Have you ever been watching a movie and seen an attempt at product placement that was so lame you wanted to toss your popcorn all over the theater, in a rage against the sheer contempt that the director/editor had for your level of intelligence?
A few hours ago, I was speaking with Good Planet Media’s Michael Kaliski at a cocktail party reception in advance of tomorrow’s Clean Business Investment Summit. He patiently explained how he gets product placement exposure in movies and television shows for green products. It really is quite an art.
“I’m not an expert at this,” I explained. “But I have to think the key to your craft is discretion. When people find it obvious, it’s offensive.” Hey! Turns out I’m right, for once, according to Michael. Check out his website to learn more.
It’s unfortunate that this piece couldn’t have been written ten years ago. I am one of those people that does not understand why the EV community has not been talking about why we have not been driving more affordable, longer range EVs for the last ten years and why we had to wait for Li-ion technology when there was proven, less expensive, longer-lasting and recycleable NiMH (nickel metal hydride). Every time I see my friend’s 10 year old Toyota RAV4-EV go 100 miles on its original batteries (PEVE 95), I think it’a a crime against humanity; everyone could have been driving an even better NiMH powered car.
For some time now, I have listened to Chevron’s excuses about how they sold Cobasys and how it’s not their hot potato anymore without admitting that they or GM still controls the rights to NiMH for EVs. Their smokescreen is aided and abetted by the press which chooses to play dumb or is afraid to address the issue. The fact is that Chevron and GM still control NiMH use and are responsible for at least ten years of increased consumer transportation costs and more pollution than 10 Gulf Disasters.
Craig, am I preaching to the choir?
Perhaps, but I appreciate what you’ve said there, and you’re 100% on target. I never thought of it as a “crime against humanity,” as you put it, yet it’s actually quite apt. Thanks for writing.
I know not everyone studies the well-to-wheels comparisons of fuel sources for transportation, and that there are people who harbor grave misunderstanding in the area. Here, frequent commenter Glenn Doty writes:
With our current grid, nearly 100% of the energy used to power EV’s will be coal. That means that a Nissan Leaf will cause more than twice the emissions/mile as a Toyota Prius, and that’s only the marginal emissions. Once the initial capital emissions are considered, it will be significantly worse still.
In no way would EV’s be better for the environment than HEV’s – which are far less expensive.
EV’s will universally do far greater harm than ICEV’s if you compare similar size vehicles. So why are they being pushed as “green”?
All I can say in response is to request that he – and others who have similar beliefs – read one of the numerous studies on auto emissions that has been done recently on the subject, like this one by Sherry Boschert showing just the opposite.
If you haven’t attended one of the Techbrew MegaMixers, I’m afraid words may fail to communicate what they’re like. Let’s just say “cleantech entrepreneurs and investors meet the absolute core of the meaning of the phrase ‘New Age.’” Musical performace by B4Neptune. Trippy, but without a doubt, a very worthwhile experience. At the least, the folks I met at the 2011 incarnation last night made it more than worth the drive.
Tom Blakeslee is a 2GreenEnergy friend, a widely-published author, a philanthropist, and a really smart guy. He also plays a mean game of paddle tennis, as I learned first-hand, when I met him at his home in Southern California.
Here’s another in a series of free reports, based on the results of a recent 2GreenEnergy survey of industry businesspeople. Linked here, “How US Companies Can Build Relationships with China” is now available for free download.
The sheer volume of questions I receive on China every week is ridiculous – and it seems to be growing even larger. People in cleantech view China the way the famous robber viewed banks: it’s where the money is. And, as the US continues to sit on its hands and let the rest of the world lead the way to clean energy, folks are looking to China as the real source of vision and power in this space. As an American, I’m not happy about it, but it’s true.
As you’ll notice, the report presents the level of interest that American entrepreneurs have in various activities vis-à-vis China. It’s broken down along numerous different “sub-interests: selling products and services, raising capital from Chinese public sector agencies and private investors, developing relationships with manufacturers, establishing sales channels, and protecting IP from expropriation by Chinese or other foreign companies. We also asked people about their interests in certain general areas of technology: LED lighting, water purification, renewable energy, energy efficiency, electric transportation, and sustainable architecture.
The survey also explores a number of higher level issues:
The most exciting aspects – as well as the drawbacks — of the rapidly expanding size of the Chinese economy in renewable energy, electric transportation, and cleantech more generally
Fears associated with dealing with the Chinese, and the changes respondents would like to see regarding the way the Chinese operate with respect to the rest of the world
If you download the report, you’ll learn:
The level of awareness and excitement concerning business potential that China represents generally
What exactly is fueling this enthusiasm
Where respondents see the greatest areas of concern and fear
How respondents perceive the challenges associated with poor product quality; issues with communication and cross-cultural understanding, and customs that make conflict resolution quite difficult and intellectual property hard to protect
Response to moral issues: sustainability and human rights
These are all monstrously tough issues. I’m reminded of the cartoon in which a scientist is presenting two equations, between which he’s written: “Miracle occurs here.” Apparently, that’s what we need.