Cleantech and the Recession

I just wrote a post on how cleantech is weathering the recession – you can check it out here.

Perspective

I took a business trip today, starting to my alarm at 5:30, hair mussed and mind in disarray, annoyed at everything and nothing and particularly at the fact that my head was no longer on my pillow.  I woke slowly through my shower, the shuttle bouncing over dark city streets to the airport, the elaborate dance that is airport security.  On the plane, I cast a glance out the window every few minutes until sleep overcame me.  After a long meeting, I repeated the process, planes, trains, and taxis finally delivering me back to my house well after sunset.

Mountain ridges spread below me today, snow white peaks running into brown earth slopes that pooled in dense green valleys.  They ran for miles in all directions, bright mountain cascades next to a darkened sea. Their tones shifted during the day, first light catching the crests and working its way down the ridges and into the valleys until all were lit – deep, soft tones that crisped and then flattened as the sun climbed.  After a productive meeting, I watched the process reverse itself in the evening, the light traveling back up the slopes until all was dark save the shining white crests.  As the sun set, a skein of thin clouds right below me caught fire, and I watched the shadowed slopes roll by through a pale pink curtain.

Today began as Day#1 but ended as Day#2, the only change being my perspective.

A Weekend Well Spent

I spent this past weekend at Point Reyes National Seashore, over 70,000 acres of high bluffs and coastal scrub along the coast north of San Francisco. I left work early on Friday, Zipcarred across the Golden Gate Bridge, and scribbled my car make and model onto the camping permit as the last glow of the sunrise faded behind the coastal mountains separating the Bear Valley Visitor Center from the Pacific.

It was a clear night, but only a few stars had emerged as I entered the live oak forest of Mt. Wittenberg and began climbing. I emerged into clearings every 20 minutes or so, and the stars multiplied each time until a swath of milky white streaked across the sky. I saw Dippers and Bears, satellites arcing across the sky, flashing stars that I imagined as pulsars flaring lightyears away. As I neared my campsite, a falling comet blazed the sky for a full two seconds to light my way as I heard the waves of the nearby ocean pounding the sandy shore.

I awoke Saturday morning to water of a different sort – misty rain stippling the tent over my head, soaking the ground around me, enveloping me as I emerged and surveyed a foggy world. I had hoped for views of the ocean that had greeted me by sound but not sight the night before. It remained hidden, though I heard it still. I retreated from the foggy rain into the forest armed with rain jacket, hot chocolate, and The Kite Runner. They were sufficient for a few hours, but the rain picked up, and I was soaked through. Shivering, I packed up my bag and slung it, dripping, over my back as I watched the rain pour off of my nose and onto the grass waiting below me. The drops of rain were as numerous as the stars, every bit as much a part of the spinning universe. It is not always easy to smile while shivering, but I managed it as I squelched back down to my waiting car.

Earth2Tech

GigaOM recently launched a new blog at the intersection of tech innovation and the environmental movement.  I may be writing some content for them down the line, but don’t let that deter you – there will be good stuff there too.  Take a look at the welcome post here.

Smaller or Techier?

Today’s environmental movement is experiencing some philosophical tension. Or at least I am. As green gets more and more attention, including constant exposure in the press, green issues in everything from Rolling Stone to Fortune, a documentary by Leonardo DiCaprio, and even recognition by the Bush administration, the pieces are falling into place for serious environmental progress. Yet whose environmental vision will we follow? While it is becoming trendy to buy hybrids and purchase carbon offsets for everything from corporate operations to individual plane flights, is that the point? Does green necessitate technological innovation or a complete lifestyle change?

The short (and easy) answer is that it will take a bit of both. As consciousness rises, households will buy CFLs, efficient windows and appliances, and greener consumer products. Businesses will realize that economic and environmental conservation are aligned. Lifecycle costs matter more than sticker price, and a bit more up-front investment pays huge dividends down the line in energy savings and reduction of waste materials that are toxic to the bottom line and human and natural environments alike. At the same time, a cap-and-trade or carbon tax system will push innovation in low- and no-carbon technologies, erasing the polluting impact of today’s activities through renewable energy and more efficient recycling and re-use of materials.

That is a comfortable view of the future and one that does not require exceptional change from the average person. But it is also incorrect. The short, easy answer is oftentimes the one that goes astray. When the move to go green lived on the fringes, it took pleasure in radically re-orienting society. It re-designed communities, creating micro-communities where families live closer to each other and to schools, parks, and businesses, where walking, bicycling, and greenspace take preference over commuting, big business, and pavement. It frowned on flying cross-country every week and sought to localize both our lives and our impacts. Small was beautiful.

I like the latter view. By modeling our lives after natural processes (local, homegrown, and community-based), we can solve many of our biggest environmental and social problems. We will know our neighbors, send our children to better schools, know what a healthy forest smells like, even inside of a city. Yet do I walk my talk? Across my entire block, I know two neighbors (and them not well). I do not own a car, and I fly infrequently, but my network of family and friends could wrap around the world a few times over. My computer is not Enegy Star certified. If I am not willing to make more sweeping changes in my own life, what do I expect of others? So I find myself hoping that technological innovation comes quickly, because deeper change is going to take a long time.

Future Thinking

Just finished reading Natural Capitalism, a forecast of the future of American business and society. Contrary to my expectations, the book transcends doomsday – it strikes an optimistic yet realistic tone as it posits a re-orientation of business and society. As the title suggests, the authors hope to steer modern markets away from industrial processes that stripmine the natural world and towards a system in which natural capital receives its due value in terms of economic inputs and life-sustaining ecosystems. The authors, along with astute envivonmental observers, know that the transition is coming. Our  increasing degradation of the earth’s natural systems in pursuit of GDP growth is unsustainable. And humanity has no alternatives once those natural systems collapse. But that need not be our fate- the book outlines scores of examples of early green adopters who have saved millions (and created positive change in their offices and communities) through efficiency gains, improved design principles, and systems planning. Those changes, far from bringing “acceptable losses”, created growth, an edge over competition, and satisfied employees. The authors assuredly wear rose-tinted glasses – even I found myself rolling my eyes at times. But their tenets are sound. Some combination of politicians, the media, and business lobbyists have focused the debate around what we stand to lose in valuing our natural environment. In letting them frame the argument, we have forgone the upside – technological innovation, new jobs, improved quality of life and human health, an unsullied future for our grandchildren. All while growing the economy.

Energy Bill Entropy

The Senate this past Thursday passed an “energy” bill, but Senate wrangling whittled away most energy sectors, leaving automotive fuel economy as the only substantive issue addressed. It is impossible not to feel a sense of frustration at the gridlock that accompanies green legislation in this country. The political losses to the bill can be compared to our inefficient energy production and distribution networks (which disappeared from the bill). It began with a requirement for 15% renewable generation to the national grid by 2020, a necessary step to decrease America’s carbon footprint. That disappeared, as did a suite of incentives designed to translate oil & gas taxes into renewable energy subsidies. But there is an upside. Despite stiff resistance from the automotive industry, mileage standards for both cars and light trucks will climb to 35 mpg by 2020, the first legislated increase in decades, and a significant one at that. The smart CEO of Cars Inc. will realize (as suggested in Natural Capitalism) that radical efficiency increases now will cost less than incremental ones spaced over ten years. For other energy sectors, Congress may have to pursue efficiency and renewables progress a la carte, which will postpone rollout of meaningful change. Industry execs know that every day of delayed environmental legislation translates into tens of thousands of dollars saved, but in the long term it puts us at a competitive disadvantage to foreign cleantech and closer to climate change points of no return. So a Hummer in 2020 will be as efficient today’s average sedan, but the Congress is still out on renewable fuels and power.

Tracking

In the dry sands of the self

nothing leaves and everything leaves

indistinct depressions in the earth. I lose myself

in overlapping paths.

I rock back to lift my eyes where past fades

in scrub brush and red earth,

hills on a horizon

where I do and do not dwell.

Google Green in ‘07

On Tuesday, Google propelled itself ahead of the tech industry, the rest of corporate America, and even Uncle Sam with its ambitious environmental agenda. For starters, Google plans to go carbon neutral by the end of 2007. While a good thing, that does not put Google in a class by itself. Others have recently done the same. But Google is greening all of its operations, not just energy usage. From organic and local foods in the Mountain View dining halls to Google Earth mashups showing projected sea level rise to energy efficient lighting and electronics, Google hopes to take carbon emissions the way of the paper Yellow Pages. But it will not be easy. Case in point – the Mountain View Googleplex is now home to one of the largest corporate photovoltaic installments in the world. The 1.6 megawatt array provides enough juice to power around 1,000 homes but only replaces 30% of the headquarters’ peak demand. In essence, at peak the Mountain View Googleplex uses more electricity than 3,000 typical homes. So Google will build another 48 MW of renewable generation by 2012. How does Google justify the investment? Besides the obvious ‘green is good’ mantra, Google foresees a future with carbon markets. Geffrey Immelt, CEO of General Electric, recently told Thomas Friedman that “carbon has to have a value” to justify investments in renewable energies (see The Slanted Bar for commentary on Friedman’s article). Unlike most American businesses, however, Google has stopped waiting for the federal government to establish carbon markets. In planning its renewable energy investments, Google is using a self-derived “shadow price” for carbon dioxide emissions. It is a bold and risky step, one that will hopefully spur other corporations to do the same. Hats off to you, Google, for setting the bar high once again.

Coal in Congress

New Mexico is currently leading the charge both for and against legislation to stimulate US renewable energy. Senator Bingaman (D) is the main author of a bill that will require US utilities to pull 15% of their power from renewable sources by 2020. His fellow NM Senator Domenici (R) is a main opponent, forwarding a substitute that would permit nuclear energy and allow states more wiggle room in meeting requirements. The mostly Democratic support barely missed the 60 necessary votes to end debate on the bill and are planning to bring it to the floor next week. Recent press has highlighted objections to the bill from the automaking industry and the low-wind-potential South, but one opponent that has not appeared in the press is the coal lobby.

Coal state senators are hoping to get coal-to-liquids (C2L) technology lumped in with low- or no-carbon alternative fuels. There are a number of problems with this. For starters, coal is the most carbon-intensive fuel in power production today. It is a fossil fuel, its main and only advantage being domestic abundance. Proponents tout upcoming C2L and gasification technologies to turn the coal into liquids for transportation and gas for power generation, while extracting most of the associated carbon and burying it underground.

If we had no other options, I would take a hard look at C2L, but we have demonstrated alternatives in wind, solar, and biomass. I am not simply against combustion – landfill methane capture is smart and cost-effective. Removing mountains to reach new coal seams is something else altogether. Coal is a dirty fuel, end of story. Using it for power production requires environmentally devastating mining, processing and long-distance transport to power plants, expensive equipment to remove sulfur and particulates belching from the stack, with the possible addition of expensive C2L and carbon re-injection technologies! We are tied to coal for most of our power production, and I am not in favor of shutting down currently running plants. We do not have large-scale alternatives right now, but the Bingaman bill will take decisive steps to finance technological progress. Let’s run our coal power plants for their useful lives, begin investing in educational and occupational opportunities for the former coal communities of the future, and push renewable technologies. Hard.