Clean Energy and National Security

Cleantech Interest Group Help Needed

I’m in a few LinkedIn groups, as I think all LinkedIn users are by now.  One of them is for Duke alumni and students interested in Solar Energy and Solar startups.  A fellow member posted an interesting request that I decided to help cast a wide net for answers to by posting here and tweeting several of my Twitter followers.   A novel approach for me — let’s see where it goes.

From Ian Thomson, Co-founder of CleanTechies.com

“I’m looking for existing data, contacts, leads or reference material that demonstrate a strong correlation between clean/domestic energy and global security. Any help during this data gathering would be greatly appreciated; probably on both sides – if they are looking for recognition for their perspective I’ll give them ample credit for any data they can provide that supports the thesis.

“I’ve taken on the task of integrating the positive national security implications surrounding energy policy that targets reducing CO2 for a project called “GigaTon Throwdown.” My portion of the project is presenting a compelling national security argument for reducing oil consumption, using distributed generation assets, and increasing the efficacy of our budget through energy efficiency. The bulk of the heavy lifting of the 250 page book is done, it has been written by some serious academics, energy analysts and professionals, but it neglects to address these core concerns that will give it that much more attention when it is launched with support from some congressional leaders from both sides of the political spectrum. Doing my task right will assure broader buy in. “

Any help for the Gigaton Throwdown?

The Gigaton Throwdown

The Gigaton Throwdown Study was launched as a Clinton Global Initiative in 2007. It is a project to educate and inspire entrepreneurs, investors, and policy makers to think big about solving the climate crisis. It began as an effort to answer the question, “What does it take to make a difference with clean energy technology?” A unique team of entrepreneurs, investors, and business leaders teamed up with leading academics to answer this question. Specifically, we asked how could any one of nine technologies groupings, “pathways,” scale up so each one could avoid one billion tons – a gigaton — of greenhouse gas emissions per year and do it by 2020. We call this “Gigaton Scale.”

How ’bout it, Readers?  Any help for Ian out there?  Feel free to post a comment below or reach out to me on my Contact page.  I’ll close the feedback loop with Ian.

“Cap and Cash Back” — The Power of Positive Language

We can thank ecoAmerica for the “Cap and Cash Back” headline, which I gleaned from this weekend’s NYT story about how environmental communications are being framed by both “sides” of each environmental debate, from “clean coal” to “safe nuclear power.”

It certainly is catchier than “Cap and Trade” and coming from a jargon-jammed business background, I’m grateful when people use words that both insiders and outsiders readily grasp.  Your politics will determine whether you agree with the substitution of “cap and cash back” for “cap and trade” but my point about the need for clear communications stands.

Environmental and Financial Services Writing Prompts:

• The NYT article quotedRobert J. Brulle of Drexel University, an expert on environmental communications,  as saying “ecoAmerica’s campaign was a mirror image of what industry and political conservatives were doing. “The form is the same; the message is just flipped,” he said. “You want to sell toothpaste, we’ll sell it. You want to sell global warming, we’ll sell that. It’s the use of advertising techniques to manipulate public opinion.” Do you have evidence that either side is entirely in command of the facts about global warming/climate change?   Or is this simply a war of words driven by savvy PR pros?
• Mr. Perkowitz, who started ecoAmerica, said the reason environmental issues consistently trail issues like addressing moral decline and reducing the influence of lobbyists, is “When someone thinks of global warming, they think of a politicized, polarized argument. When you say ‘global warming,’ a certain group of Americans think that’s a code word for progressive liberals, gay marriage and other such issues.” Do you have reason to agree or disagree with Mr. Perkowitz?  Support your view with an anecdote or case study.
• A summary of ecoAmerica’s latest findings and recommendations was accidentally e-mailed to a number of news organizations before the formal paper was published, which raises the question, Have you or your organization authorized talking points or key words for use in environmental communications? If so, can you speak to the immediate and longer-term effects of using prescribed language (or avoiding proscribed langugage) on your organization’s objectives?

Green Investments and the US Labor Market

Soon-to-be-Relic?

A new white paper released by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) reminds that the U.S. economy lost 5.1 million jobs over the past 15 months.

With a nod to the Obama administration’s commitment to a cap and trade plan for carbon emissions, the paper warns that, nevertheless, new federal investments are needed to provide economic benefits that “go beyond the primary one of emissions reduction.”

Promising Conclusions

The EPI concludes  that a commitment of $100 billion annually in new public investments over the next decade would yield:

• Approximately $160 billion in additional output annually for the next two years, which translates  into approximately1.1 million net new jobs created.

• An increase in the relative wages of those 70% of U.S. workers without a four-year college degree by almost 0.5% each year that the increased commitment to green investments persists. While modest, this amount does represent a wage increase for high school graduates that is roughly 40% as large as the entire increase this group has seen since 1979.

• An increase of approximately 100,000 in the number of unionized jobs in the United States (even in the unlikely case that all of the jobs supported through this new spending merely displaced currently existing jobs).

Writing Prompts:  Financial, Environmental, Services, Consulting

• Respond to this EPI conclusion based on your own data and experience:  “In the short run, any investment that can be done quickly to help meet the challenges of undertaking serious carbon emissions abatement will have welcome near-term macroeconomic impacts. And over the longer-term, these investments will provide a payoff in the form of climate change mitigation, energy independence, and economic gains from energy efficiency.  In the longer run, dedicating more resources to ameliorating global climate change will actually lead to a mix of industry employment that nudges back against the forces that have generated ever-greater wage inequality for most of the past 30 years.”
• Support or refute this EPI claim: “Each dollar of infrastructure investment—broadly defined—provides on net about $1.59 in additional economic growth, making it about 33% more effective than generic tax cuts and literally 10-15 times more effective than most business tax cuts. In short, infrastructure spending, including ‘green’ investments, is about as good economic stimulus as there is.”
• This week the cap and trade debate drew comparisons to the earlier Acid Rain Trading Program, which was established in 1990 under the Clean Air Act.  The administration said it “delivered huge benefits—to the tune of $120 billion a year—with an annual cost of only $3 billion a year. The acid rain program is a trading system comparable to a carbon cap-and-trade program.”  If you were in business during that time, reflect on the similarities and differences between the Acid Rain Trading Program and cap and trade.
• A new project of the Sierra Club, National Resource Defense Council and others, called “The Reality Coalition,” takes on the premise that there is such a thing as clean coal.  Is there such a thing as “clean coal”?
• Reflect on how the administration’s proposed Green Investments and cap and trade plans would directly affect your business or that of your customers.