Aspen Environment Forum: Powering the Planet: Energy for the Long Run

Those of you who follow me on Twitter know that I've been at the 2nd Aspen Environment Forum (AEF) this week. Like the Aspen Institute's Ideas Festival, the AEF is an unusual confluence of individuals from a variety of sectors gathered together for, well, conversation.

I like this conference because of its mix of business people, NGO wonks, scientists, writers and artists, a smattering of government types, investors, and residents of Aspen. There are always intriguing synergies that develop when you pull together such a mix, and there are too few conferences that do it so well.

This year's dialogue is focused on energy and, ostensibly we're here to consider the world's needs, the alternative solutions, and the related environmental impacts or benefits.

But as much as I enjoy this conference, I'm also a little frustrated by it.

Throughout the conference, two things have struck me as problematic and perhaps in need of being addressed next year: a noted absence of conflict and a disconnect between some of the advertised topics and the sessions as conducted.

On the first point, I think conflict is essential to generate new ideas and creaitvity. It's been far too congenial here. There were notable exceptions, including a little skirmish between Patrick Moore and James Woolsey over the merits of solar vs. nuclear; and what I understand was an entertaining debate by Randy Udall and Jim Rogers of Duke Energy. (See Karl Burkart's coverage of the latter exchange.)

At least in the sessions I've attended, there has been a little false advertising. One example is yesterday's session on "Environment and Energy: Perspectives from Emerging Economies," which featured some very powerful women, including Queen Noor al Hussein and Alicia Antonio de Abreu from Mozambique.

While I agree that energy and environment issues affect women disproportionately and in often adverse ways, the discussion quickly shifted from the advertised topic to a dialogue on gender equity. Now, don't get me wrong, that's a good topic for discussion, but not what most of us in the room came to participate in.

Even more frustrating was the session on "Environment and New Media." Of the panelists, only Joel Makower (founder of Greener World Media and its related online publications, one of which I have written for in the past) could really be considered part of the "New Media." The others, including Douglas Fischer of The Daily Climate and Margie Kriz of National Journal, were decidedly "old media" and proud of it.

The panelists spent much of the time wringing their hands about the decline of newspapers and other print media. They also trashed bloggers as opinionated yahoos who don't practice journalism and are forcing the old media stalwarts to adapt to changing customer habits and needs, which might lead them to give up journalism and become news aggregators.

In other words, it felt like a wake for old media rather than a substantive discussion about the merits or drawbacks of new media. (To be fair, Chip Giller of Grist.org was originally scheduled to be on this panel, but weather kept him away. He may have added a different tone to the dialogue.)

And it was solely focused on news/journalism and delivery. Where was the dialogue on mobile apps, social networks, and other new media? A missed opportunity.

Engaging the speakers and moderators in developing the overall theme and designing individual sessions may help in future conferences.

Among the highlights of this year's conference: Dr. Jane Lubchenco's conversation with the Washington Post's Juliet Eilperin. We are very lucky to have Dr. Lubchenco at the helm of NOAA; she is a brilliant scientist with a unique ability among brilliant scientists to communicate effectively to a general audience.

There was also better international representation this year, with people from several African countries, Latin America, the Indian sub-continent, the Middle East, and China.

I'm hopeful that today's program, which includes dialogues on conservation, energy efficiency, the Arctic, and China, will be focused and stimulating.

Related articles by Zemanta

• It's time to kill the idea that newspapers are essential for democracy. (slate.com)
• The Twitterati Destroy the News (gawker.com)
• Media Biz: Layoffs at NY Times, Washington Post are not a surprise (dailyfinance.com)
• Big Think: Jordan's Queen Noor on inspiration through service (salon.com)
• Review: Strategies for the Green Economy by Joel Makower (greenskeptic.blogspot.com)
• Being Green May Help Business in Bad Times (time.com)

Review: Strategies for the Green Economy by Joel Makower

Joe Makower is truly a green guru.

Two decades ago he wrote The Green Consumer (which we published when I worked at Viking Penguin), and over the past 20 years he's become one of the leading advisers and sustainability strategists to Fortune 500 companies.

He knows how to navigate green waters and has ridden enough green waves to show you how to do it too.

Best of all, he doesn't take himself too seriously -- and he doesn't think consumers will ever completely make the change. In other words, you can believe what he says.

Countless pretenders would have you believe that people will change their way of living and buy their way to a better future or greener pastures. Makower, in his new book, Strategies for the Green Economy: Opportunities and Challenges in the New World of Business, says it's probably not possible, given how much consumer habits -- and people in general -- would have to change.

And after more than two decades, Makower seems to think that the more things change the more things stay the same. All the green marketing efforts -- and even the greening of many products and services -- has failed to move the needle when it comes to taking action.

And it turns out, we're all to blame.

"The result of all this--motivated but distrustful consumers, proactive but humble companies, aggressive but often misguided activists, the media's mixed messages, and the lack of norms and standards of what is 'good enough' -- is that it is almost impossible to create a workable green strategy that meets the expectations of a confused and cynical marketplace," Makower writes. "Did I mention that this is a dysfunctional conversation?"

Makower has the research to back up his claims, although the lack of any notes in the book makes it difficult to verify some of the source materials. He has reviewed and studied most of the major consumer-related research on green awareness and attitudes, and he shares with his readers how to interpret such data for their own use.

Part of the problem, according to Makower, stems from the relative complexity of the issues, whether it's climate change, environmental degradation or what it means to be a "good enough" green company. It turns out; it really isn't easy being green, after all.

"What many people don't seem to know (or have forgotten) is that the 'three R's' [reduce, reuse, recycle] represent more than just a clever alliteration; they are a hierarchy of priorities," Makower writes.

He identifies a corresponding hierarchy when it comes to climate change: Reduce your overall consumption of energy; purchase as much as possible from Renewable sources; and Remedy the climate impacts of nonrenewable energy consumed by purchasing carbon offsets.

The staccato style of the book's chapters, which read a bit like a series of loosely connected blog posts (maybe they were?), can be a little disconcerting. Makower covers a lot of ground in such a relatively short book.

Makower concludes that the "virus called the green economy has not hit critical mass." More companies are paying attention and developing programmatic strategies (look at Wal-Mart, GE, and others). "But a high level of interest does not a tipping point make."

Still, in the end, Makower believes there are enormous opportunities for success -- for consumers, companies, and for ordinary citizens. And green will be an enduring issue for businesses and shareholders for years to come.

Strategies for the Green Economy begins to provide a roadmap for companies to create lasting value by going green.


(Disclosure: I formerly wrote for GreenBiz.com, one of Joel Makower's publications.)