We have a dream

Its an easy hobby of many to look back with nostalgia (and perhaps even shame) at the breathtaking investments made in civil infrastructure by our predecessors.

It seems that today we can barely muster the communal will to repair potholes except during a brief window before every election. Even then, there might be protests that fixing potholes only encourages more cars...

Its hard to imagine how our Giant Ancestors managed the feats of civil infrastructure that we have inherited.

Here's one theory:
They did it because it was fun.

The fact is that these endeavours were embraced because of their scope and majesty. Their era judged these projects without hesitation. To be a part of the new generation was energizing enough to overcome the barriers that our modern eyes find so intimidating.

Back then, any major new project was welcomed with parades and every community leader was on the same side: progress, growth, technology, prosperity.

For a few decades now, we've been cautiously preoccupied with avoiding, fearing and tidying up of unanticipated consequences. It is wise to be cautious, but it has become an entrenched habit for us. Today, any new project is first opposed by whoever's backyard it is in. Power lines obstruct views. But then others join in opposition. More power lines means more houses, means more cars, means more traffic and more pollution. We have come to equate "progressive" with "anti-growth".

But the assumptions underlying that attitude are about to change. We've gone back to the drawing board for the next generation of infrastructure and at last we have the right solutions in hand. The clean efficient foundation of Solar and Wind power are the roots from which an exciting new era of infrastructure build will now bloom.

The reflex to oppose will still twitch, but when those proposed power lines are the first link in the new national smart grid, carrying power from solar farms with greater efficiency than ever before and that power will drive electric cars, public transportation ...the muscle that was once opposition will flex with pride and enthusiasm.

We've caught our breath for a generation, taken inventory and sharpened our pencils.

Now its time to dust off the old dreams, and soar again.

Green becomes Clean becomes $$$

At Harvard Business School’s Cyberposium 2007 in Palo Alto today(11/10/07), the final panel topic of the day was Clean Tech. However, the message sent was quite different from what we have become used to.
The spirit of green has evolved through the years. Originally, efforts to be green were aimed at achieving results independent of financial goals. It was essentially, a philanthropic endeavor.
More recently, green efforts have become at least financially neutral. A company can pursue operations in a manner applauded as green with minimal disruption to the bottom line. Given the positive PR impact of visible green practices, doing so becomes easier and easier.

But that will not be enough for green to find widespread adoption.

Interestingly, the change is already in play, and is flagged by a change in terminology: “green” to “clean”. The change in terminology seems to indicate an emphasis on smartness and efficiency rather than solely on environmentalist lifestyle. (A similar transformation has occurred, changing "alternative energy" to "renewable energy".)

At a Conference of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers in September 2007, each session was rich with new technologies and approaches heralding a new era of Clean Tech. Although these technologies certainly were environmentally friendly, that was not the main discussion point among the assembled mechanical engineers.

Think about it: Clean Tech solutions are low power, lightweight and durable. Clean Tech uses the most advanced materials and the most precise and intelligent control systems.

For engineers, Clean Tech is cool.

With a new generation of engineers flocking to Clean Technology, important breakthroughs are being made. No longer the province of philanthropy, Clean Tech is profitable.

The Cyberposium panelists, representing Intel (Mac Agan), SAP (Tobias Dosch) and the city of San Jose (Mayor Chuck Reed) each expressed the priority of pragmatic bottom line results in their respective Clean Tech Efforts. As Mac Agan put it, profitability is at the root of sustainability. No company can embrace Clean Tech solutions unless they lead to market results.

Tobias Dosch contrasted SAP’s Clean Tech endeavors with the elsewhere-popular “Greenwashing” by pointing out that the solution products they produce supporting Clean Tech solutions are market driven and are value added features of their full product offering. Its not green for the sake of being green. Its good business.

San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed also made it clear that (even as a government entities) we cannot simply throw money at Clean Tech because its popular. He outlined his comprehensive plan for the City of San Jose to become a model to the World for how smart implementation of Clean Tech can help a city be more efficient, more livable and at the same time foster this blossoming new industry.

Something else was evident in the panel discussion that is a legacy from the philanthropic roots of Green: esprit de corps. An earlier panel on the state of the cell phone service market revealed enormous barriers to innovation in “big guy” vs “little guy” non-cooperation. In contrast, the Clean Tech space seems to radiate cooperation among large and small players. The incumbents are welcoming entrepreneurs with open arms to partner on solutions. This might be best evidenced by Intel having brought not one, but TWO representatives from Intel Capital to network the audience of entrepreneurs for investment opportunities in order to foster the sloutions it will need in the near future.

Our global industrial infrastructure is inefficient and aging -ripe for reworking. It is a fortunate thing for all of us that Clean Tech has arrived at just the moment when the reworking can begin. The opportunity for investment is extraordinary.

You just might have to bully your way into line ahead of the likes of Intel Capital.

Cast a Giant Circle

Drawing a circle around a company's environmental footprint is tricky. Does it end at the front desk? or should the circle include the downstream consequences and benefits as well?

Many companies produce intelligent products and services that enable millions to reduce their energy consumption. In the process, their employees may drive cars to work and their data centers may glow like the Sun.

But if the products they produce reduce their customer's own driving (Ebay) or the new version of their product consumes far less power than last year's model (Intel), the result can be factories that save more energy than they consume in the full global context.

Once the purview of avid environmentalists, the cause for conservation is being taken over by the market. Conservation and Clean Tech is good business. People are now saving energy because it saves money.

There was a time when conservation was a major concession to operational effectiveness and only a niche product feature. But today, Clean Tech solutions hit every component of the bottom line.

Clean Tech materials are lightweight, durable and because of their design for sustainability are less susceptible to supply interruptions. A lower power product upgrade can actually pay for itself in energy savings. A company may not even stake claim to "Cleanness" in its promotion. Clean Tech based products are simply better products.

An update of the old saw might be well heeded by those who would protest the drivers of the new Clean Economy:

You have to spend energy in order to save energy.