In a May Vector story, we covered a detailed report from Ogilvy & Mather (Ogilvy Earth) about “mainstreaming green” in the U.S. One of the recommendations of the study was a call to corporations to bring simple greener products to the masses and educate them for mass adoption. From the top down and bottom up, the U.S. needs to become more aware and more green, says the report.
From the corporate world, SC Johnson is indeed taking a step for mass implementation. On July 1st, 2011, it launched the Windex Mini, a concentrated refill pouch that uses 90% less plastic (more…)
A white paper authored by Schneider Electric suggests that meeting greenhouse gas emissions targets will fail unless “Active Energy Efficiency” becomes compulsory. They define “Active Energy Efficiency” as “effecting permanent change through measurement, monitoring and control of energy usage,” and contrast this to “Passive Energy Efficiency,” which is regarded as the installation of countermeasures against thermal losses, the use of low consumption equipment and so forth.
The paper concludes, “Without proper control, these measures often merely militate against energy losses rather than make a real reduction in energy consumed and in the way it is used.”
I suppose this is really the crux of the political debate about CFLs versus incandescent lightbulbs, and the many other similar points of discussion. Do we have some sort of “right” to use energy in any way we please? We understandably resent government telling us what to do, but can’t we see the legitimacy of standards that are aimed at ensuring a clean and life-supporting planet?
Obviously, the ideal situation is one in which people don’t need to be forced to do the right thing. But how close are we to that? In the meanwhile, I think we need to support the idea of environmental standards for all our business and consumer products – to the degree that they can be established fairly, without the undue influence of money and power.
Of course, that doesn’t sound like a piece of cake either ….
Brazil aims to triple its renewable energy use by 2020, according to the new national plan. Wind energy has a strong place in the plans, along with small hydropower. Brazil has already reached 1 GW from wind energy alone this year – and the goal is to be at 12 GW by 2020.
The country plans to generate 16% of its electricity from renewable (more…)
In our July 2011 webinar “Corporate Sustainability: Tapping the Incredible Wisdom of Nature,” I interview Kathryn Alexander, leader of Ethical Impact, a group that helps the corporate world in issues concerning sustainability.
In his farewell address in 1961, Dwight D. Eisenhower, warned us:
“You and I, and our government must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow.”
I was only six years old at the time, quite unaware of the insight that Ike had bestowed upon us. Of course, he wasn’t the first. 150 years earlier, Thomas Jefferson wrote: “It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes.”
I bring this up to call your attention to Jeremy Grantham’s quarterly newsletter, in which he writes about the strengths and weaknesses of capitalism as it applies to forming the underpinning of our society. He notes:
Capitalism, despite its magnificent virtues in the short term – above all, its ability to adjust to changing conditions – has several weaknesses that affect this issue.
o It cannot deal with the tragedy of the commons, e.g., overfishing, collective soil erosion, and air contamination.
o The finiteness of natural resources is simply ignored, and pricing is based entirely on short-term supply and demand.
o More generally, because of the use of very high discount rates, modern capitalism attributes no material cost to damage that occurs far into the future. Our grandchildren and the problems they will face because of a warming planet with increasing weather instability and, particularly, with resource shortages, have, to the standard capitalist approach, no material present value.
It is clear that there is a time and place for an enlightened government to step in and regulate market activity such that it does not jeopardize our future.
Enlightened government. Does anybody know where I can get some of that?
Virtually no one doubts the basic concept. But how soon in our future (or how recently in our past) does that point lie? And what are its consequences?
A few weeks ago, a fine — and well-read friend told me over breakfast in New York, “Did you know that there’s enough oil under South Dakota to last 200 years?”
“That’s amazing,” I replied. “Then what’s all the fuss about?”
“Damn environmentalists.”
I’m not sure it’s that easy. The truth, which he, as an educated man should have known, is that we truly have exhausted the supply of easy-to-find oil, but that there is a huge deposit of shale/tar sands oil, whose economic and environmental costs of extraction are extreme.
Is there more oil? Yes. Does that provide us an easy answer? Not in the least.
I just received an interesting phone call. Chris Mason, renewable energy contractor in Anguilla (Caribbean) called to discuss my work in Bermuda and understand how it might apply to his country a thousand miles south.
Mason speaks in a calm, measured tone, but there was clearly urgency in his voice as well. “We pay $0.41 to $0.43 a kilowatt-hour for electricity here, and it’s ruining us. The major hotel says that it will be forced to close its doors if we can’t come up with less expensive electricity. But no one is really trying to solve the problem. Can we talk about this?” he implored.
“Of course. Let me ask you: What are the issues re: solar?” I asked.
“It’s cultural,” Mason explained. “As far as the leaders here are concerned, there is no problem to fix. You flip a switch and the lights come on. Until the power goes out, there is no issue at all. I can do solar arrays for private customers, but there’s no incentive. Not only are there no feed-in tariffs, it’s even illegal to tie them to the grid.”
“Isn’t there any public consciousness on the subject?” I asked. “Won’t these so-called ‘leaders’ eventually be replaced by more enlightened people?”
“Oh yes, the government turns over completely every four years. But instability just makes the problem worse. Investors have no certainty in what they’ll be dealing with even a few short years in the future.”
“I hear you,” I sympathized. “I can tell you about a larger country in which that kind of uncertainty is putting a damper on clean energy. It’s called the United States.”
As we chatted and exchanged ideas, I came to know Chris as a terrific person with a heart the size of Texas. Information on his company, Comet Energy, and his blog, Caribbean Renewable, is linked here.
My schoolboy education in Philadelphia in the 1960 and early 1970s was provided by Quakers – avowed pacifists, who characteristically objected to the Vietnam War, many of whom were no strangers to civil disobedience to get their points across. Wilbert Braxton proudly served as Penn Charter’s headmaster for 29 years (and, as I can attest, quite a tough-minded teacher for us second-year physics students). But while headmaster Braxton may have appeared to us a frail old man, his son was young, and even tougher-minded, fully on his game as a war protester.
I had the opportunity to read a transcript of Braxon Jr’s address to a judge who could have sent him to prison for evading the draft, as he staunchly refused to take up arms. He delivered then, in 1968, an address that is still regarded as a definitive treatise on conscientious objection to war.
I have to say that my initial impression of DeCristopher was one of silly, irresponsible lawlessness. But I defy anyone to read his statement and not take away a feeling of profound truth and justice. I encourage response — especially from those who have read his statement in full.
If you’re searching for an effective “onramp” to the multi-trillion dollar clean energy industry, I’ll hope you’ll attend “The Clean Energy Onramp” (details here).
I personally guarantee that you’ll leave the event with a comprehensive understanding of the most critical issues that are driving the biggest wins – and most stunning losses – in the renewable energy space.
My illustrious guest and I will offer a great deal of practical information that will help you make solid, well-conceived choices in this arena. Onramp is a vigorous, interactive discussion in which Green Chip Stock’s Jeff Siegel and I will walk you through what we believe to be the most important business trends in alternative energy.
If you’re available on Thursday, October 6th, 2011, please try to join us in New York City for this half-day working lunch – the first of our high-level events.
I wanted to get this to you now, so you can take advantage of our “early-bird discount” (45%), valid until midnight Sunday.