How My Simple Purpose Statement Stays Fresh [Hint: It's Real]

My sons, Jasper & Walker, in Alaska, July 2008

“My goal is to catalyze innovation and investments that generate a new prosperity by improving our world, sustaining our environment, and generating profits.”

These words are posted at the very top of my LinkedIn profile and, come to think of it, these same words appear on the top of my resume as well. 

Yesterday, a new contact on the site noticed my words and commented on it, wanting to hear more. That got me thinking about its origins and relevance.

I remember writing this goal statement twenty years ago in a workshop led by one of my mentors, the consultant and philanthropy guru Simone Joyaux. I lived in Alaska, where I worked for The Nature Conservancy, and my first son had just been born. I sat on the board of a professional association there and we invited Simone to speak at our annual conference.

Envision the world you want to live in and the impact you want to have, Simone instructed us. Then think of your goal – in life, work or life and work – and how you might achieve that vision.

This is what I came up with, “to catalyze innovation and investments that generate a new prosperity by improving our world, sustaining our environment, and generating profits.”

I don’t remember editing it much after putting it to paper. Perhaps I tweaked it a little and smoothed out any rough edges, but it’s pretty much intact. And it stuck.

Every few years I revisit this goal statement, taking a fresh look. Should I rewrite it? Does it need updating? The goal is twenty years old. Does it still express who I want to be in the world?

Reviewing this purpose, however, I always end up recommitting to it. It’s still my goal, and has been on my journey since it was written -- from The Nature Conservancy to Ashoka to VerdeStrategy and, even at EY, where what I’ve done over the past five years touches several aspects of that goal.

Surprisingly, even at a big four accounting and advisory firm, I’ve been able to find work with purpose.

My work at EY over the past five years includes working with cleantech CEOs on their growth journey and developing a digital grid solution from a single smart metering engagement in South Africa to a partnership with Microsoft that will soon scale the solution around the globe and help utilities extend power to more people.

In the workshop Simone led, she also asked us to follow up our goal by stating how we get to the what; how we achieve our goal. Here’s how I put it:

“I do this by working with people committed to collaboration and breakthrough innovation, linking vision to action with people, and attracting and deploying capital to achieve results and lasting impact.”

Seems like a tall order, but when you break it down, it becomes clear:

1.) We’re better working together than at cross purposes, so finding others committed to collaboration and innovation is essential to move forward;

2.) Creating a vision is one thing, linking it to the action we will take ensures the vision has a chance to be realized; and finally,

3.) We can’t do anything without capital, so we better be able to attract it if we want to achieve results and lasting impact.

I’m proud of the fact that my goal statement – my purpose – hasn’t really changed in 20 years. It still represents the vision I have for the world and how I’ll show up in it. The vehicles I use and the people and organizations with whom I collaborate may change, but my purpose remains the same.

I’ll follow up this post with some real-world examples -- and thank my new contact for prompting me to think about my goal and purpose again all these years later.

Pulling Out of Paris Agreement is Bad for Business

Should we stay or should we go?

President Trump is following the advice of entrenched, vested old-economy interests that would turn our backs on a bright economic future. If his vision to make America great again requires further dependence upon fossil fuels like coal and oil, then we are headed back into the Dark Ages. 

The Paris Agreement isn't a lock on the bridge.
It is the bridge.

Explain to me how ceding the economic prosperity represented by energy innovation, and climate mitigation and adaptation to China and India makes us great? 

Leaving the Paris Agreement throws our climate and future economic success under a bus. In doing so, Trump ignores the pleas of his Secretary of State, his daughter, several conservative Republicans, and many of the most successful high-growth company leaders in the US. This isn't just sad, it's a bad decision.

Staying in the Paris Agreement is good for business, as CEOs of 30 companies with major operations in the United States, including Dow Chemical, Proctor & Gamble, Goldman Sachs, and Coca-Cola (not exactly greenies!) argued in a 10 May letter to the President. 

Why? Because, as an ad that ran in major U.S. newspapers, including the New York Times, New York Post, Wall Street Journal, and elsewhere, which was signed by technology giants like Apple, Facebook, Google, Gap, HP, along with energy and utility powerhouses National Grid, PG&E, and Schneider Electric, explained, the Paris Agreement spurs economic growth in the United States by strengthening competitiveness, creating jobs and markets, and reducing business risks.

When even ExxonMobil (and its former CEO, Rex Tillerson, now Secretary of State) supports the Paris Agreement and believes the oil company "has a constructive role to play in developing solutions," it's hard to understand what is motivating the President to pull out at this stage.

The Paris Agreement provides a level playing field for all countries -- except Nicaragua and Syria, which are the only two countries refusing to sign (great company, huh?), provides certainty for businesses and investors, which in turn allows for long-term planning and investment, and encourages market-based solutions and innovations that can benefit our economy, build a new manufacturing base, and create a future-focused industry.

Pulling out of the Paris Agreement is bad for business, bad for the planet, and a bad deal.

My Top 5 Reasons Cleantech Is Alive and Well

Here's My Top 5 reasons cleantech is alive and well:

 
1.) China. China finally seems poised to address its outrageous pollution problem. The Beijing Municipal Bureau of Environmental Protection estimates it will cost China upwards of $800 billion to clean its air. $800 billion. Cleaning up Beijing alone could cost as much as $163 billion. And its water doesn't fair much better: seventy percent of the groundwater in the north China plain is unfit for human contact. Not just consumption, contact. And only half the water sources for Chinese cities are safe to drink. The Chinese government says it will commit 1.7 trillion yuan ($277 billion) to combat air pollution over the next five years, which is a start, but until then we'll keep seeing scenes like the "LED sunrise" on Tiananmen Square that went viral.

LED sunrise on Tiananmen Square. Credit: ChinaFotoPress via Getty Images

2.) Google bought Nest for $3.2 billion. This is a cleantech success story. I don't care whether Nest Labs ever considered itself a cleantech company since its founding in 2011. If cleantech is the set of new technologies and business model innovations that help use natural resources more efficiently, effectively, and responsibly, then Nest, which took a ubiquitous, yet poorly designed technology (the thermostat), made it smart and fun to save energy in homes because its cool and easy to use. That is cleantech.

Nest thermostat. Photo: Nest Labs

3.) Solar, distributed solar. I know, solar was a dirty word for some investors, including the American tax payer, who got burned by solar 1.0. But there's a new game in town now that solar panels are cheap and financing distributed solar has become easier thanks to innovators like SolarCity, Sungevity, and the like. Installations are on the rise and investment is pouring back in.

4.) Tesla Model S. Motor Trend Car of the Year. 2014 Detroit News Readers' Choice Award as North American International Auto Show Most Innovative Vehicle. Yes, D-E-T-R-O-I-T News. Tesla  announced earlier this year it had sold 6,900 of its Model S in the fourth quarter -- twenty-five percent higher than the previous quarter and roughly twenty percent more than expected. And they recently announced the Model 3 (formerly, Model E, but it turns out Ford owned that), which will sell for about $40,000, Tesla is in line for growth and more growth. That's for a company with $27.25b market cap.

.

Tesla Model S. Photo: SEA

5.) Many more innovations are needed. Energy efficiency, recycling, water use, as well as purity and scarcity, and food are all ripe for cleantech disruptions, innovations, and solutions. There are still plenty of opportunities out there for entrepreneurs, investors, and others to tackle resource scarcity, use, and management. We've only just begun to address the issues our planet faces. And the need for innovative financing to enable these solutions is also going to grow. Call it what you will, "cleantech" is going to be a growth engine for many years to come.


Cleantech isn't dead. It hasn't crashed, it hasn't lost its value, and it has only grown more important and necessary. Cleantech is alive and well.


(NOTE: This is a slight, updated edit of an earlier post I wrote on The Green Skeptic.)

Want a Different Lens? Hire a Poet

Poets See Through a Different Lens

Roger Ehrenberg of IA Ventures posted on Twitter last night that his investment firm was looking for a new partner.

He linked to a blog post in which he wrote they wanted to get "some new perspectives in the Firm to help us look at opportunities through a different lens."

I thought immediately that Roger should hire a poet. Why?

"For one, poetry teaches us to wrestle with and simplify complexity," as John Coleman, co-author of Passion and Purpose: Stories from the Best and Brightest Young Business Leaders wrote in the Harvard Business Review blog last November.

Coleman observed, "Harman Industries founder Sidney Harman once told The New York Times, 'I used to tell my senior staff to get me poets as managers. Poets are our original systems thinkers. They look at our most complex environments and they reduce the complexity to something they begin to understand.'"

Second, poets are -- despite the seeming loneliness of their primary pursuit -- more sociable beings.

Coleman referred to a 2006 study conducted by the Poetry Foundation, claiming the "number one thematic benefit poetry users cited was 'understanding' -- of the world, the self, and others. They were even found to be more sociable than their non-poetry-using counterparts."

Further, poets and poetry readers may have more finely developed "qualitative and creative" skills and "creative judgment," which would enhance the more quantitative skill sets that IA Ventures already possesses among its partners.

Finally, as Coleman noted, referencing Clare Morgan's book What Poetry Brings to Business poets and poetry readers possessed "greater 'self-monitoring' strategies that enhanced the efficacy of their thinking processes.

"These creative capabilities can help executives keep their organizations entrepreneurial, draw imaginative solutions, and navigate disruptive environments where data alone are insufficient to make progress."

In an earlier HBR blog post, Tony Golsby-Smith, an Australian business design and transformation consultant, pointed to four key attributes humanities-focused people such as poets bring to any organization.

These include an ability to understand customer needs, an emphasis on creativity and innovation, communication and presentation skills, and analyzing complexity and ambiguity.

Such individuals tend "to be curious, to ask open-ended questions, see the big picture," Golsby-Smith wrote. "This kind of thinking is just what you need if you are facing a murky future or dealing with tricky, incipient problems."

For building relationships with customers (or Limited Partners, in the case of IA Ventures), Golsby-Smith offered, "you need keen powers of observation and psychology -- the stuff of poets and novelists."

So, to Roger I say, hire a poet for your new partner at IA Ventures. You will get someone with different, yet complementary attributes to those your Firm already has on board.

A poet will certainly be passionate, articulate, and interested in engaging in constructive debate as well as building partnerships with your portfolio companies. 

At least, I know one poet who fits that description.

7th Inning Stretch: A Note of Thanks from The Green Skeptic

One of my favorite quotes about the writer-reader relationship is from Walter Lowenfels. I keep it at the top of my poetry blog as a reminder. Lowenfels wrote,

"One reader is a miracle; two, a mass movement."

I try to keep those words in mind every day as a writer.

On this the seventh anniversary of The Green Skeptic, I want to thank you, dear readers. I am grateful for your support, your comments, and your readership. I hope you are finding some sustenance here.

Seven years ago I wrote in the first post for this blog,

"As 'The Green Skeptic' I propose to create a web voice that is at once environmentally concerned, while remaining skeptical about our methods of communication and action. My blog will explore current environmental issues in a pragmatic fashion, debunking environmental myths, while supporting market-based solutions that compliment actions taken both locally and globally."

While this blog is about "challenging assumptions about how we live on the earth and protect our environment," it is also about the practice of writing.

Two bloggers I read regularly wrote eloquently about writing this week, Fred Wilson and Joshua Brown.

Fred wrote on A VC that through blogging

"I have learned to love writing. It's creative. It's a puzzle. How do I tell the story? How do I get my point across? How do I do it crisply and clearly? How do I end it on a strong note?"

Joshua, who writes the excellent blog, The Reformed Broker, suggested,

"It is in the writing that I discover what I actually think.  It is in the writing and the communicating of ideas and concepts that they truly become mine.  This is a cognitive learning thing that is very widely understood in the education world.  When I'm blogging there are two things that are happening - you, the reader, are being exposed to something I think might be important and I, the writer, am crystallizing my own beliefs and understanding of the topic at hand."

Writing is important to me. As I've written elsewhere on this blog,

"I have always been a writer -- it's all I've really ever wanted to be. Sure, I do a lot of other things, always have, much of which I've stopped doing over the years. But I'll never stop writing. It's who I am. I'm a writer."

As we mark this seventh year of The Green Skeptic together, I want to thank you again for reading. I hope to keep up my end of the bargain moving forward with good, informed writing about the issues, a healthy skepticism about both hyperbole and hysteria and, most of all, a respect for you, my readers.

Happy Thanksgiving.

From The Green Skeptic Archives: Philanthropy & Environmental Change: Should Social Capital Markets Take Over?

Deep SEA. Photo by Mickey Rosenau

[Note: While on hiatus this week, I'm posting selections from The Green Skeptic Archives. This one was originally posted on 23 October 2007.--SEA]

I'm taking up a friendly challenge here.

Lucy Bernholz, who writes the excellent blog Philanthropy 2173, and I started a blogalog (Did I just coin that term?) between our blogs about the state of philanthropy and environmental change.

It began in response to Lucy's listing of green blogs in the wake of Blog Action Day last Monday, and her noting the lack of discussion of philanthropy on the sites listed (including mine).

My defense stemmed from a concern about philanthropy and its effectiveness as an agent of change in the environmental sphere, which actually was the origin of this blog. I have grown increasingly concerned about the ability of traditional philanthropy to effect lasting change at a pace commensurate with the global challenges we face.

I expressed this concern in my essay for GreenBiz, "Confessions of a Green Skeptic," several years ago about the Earth Charter.

Back then (March 2003), I wrote, "we need to demonstrate how profitable being green can be, and how essential it is to a truly global sustainability. If we can turn the greed motivation to green motivation, effectively turning it on itself, does the means justify the end? Hard to say. But if greed isn't going away anytime soon, we are left with trying to redirect the motivation any way we can. Guilt has worked, but only gets us so far. 'Envy trumps guilt' every time."

This sentiment was influenced by Thomas Friedman's thoughts on the subject expressed in The Lexus and the Olive Tree, that "if conservationists are going to get ahead of the greedy we need to move faster. 'For now, the only way to run as fast as the herd is by riding the herd itself and trying to redirect it,' Friedman writes. 'We need to demonstrate to the herd that being green, being global, and being greedy can go hand in hand.'"

And it was echoed by Gretchen Daily and Katherine Ellison in their book, The New Economy of Nature, from which I quoted, "the record clearly shows that conservation can't succeed by charity alone. It has a fighting chance, however, with well-designed appeals to self-interest."

Things have changed quite a bit since I wrote that essay -- the world has gotten flatter, green has become the new black, Al Gore won an Academy Award and a Nobel Prize for his work on climate change, and the herd has started to move to greener pastures.

But a lot hasn't changed. In Philanthropy, as Susan Raymond points out in a two-part piece called "Does Philanthropy Scale?," the "vast majority of American nonprofits are small; 60 percent or more...have less than $100,000 in annual revenue." And, Raymond notes, "the average foundation grant to nonprofits is on the order of $25,000."

Raymond also points out that "the number of nonprofits with $10 million or more in revenue has increased by 73 percent in the last decade," and asks, "when $25,000 is the average grant, is philanthropy the answer to organizational growth? Indeed, is it even relevant as a source of capital?"

I'm going to quote one more thing from Raymond's essay: "The evolution of microfinance teaches that, when what had been a philanthropic initiative matures and proves its worth, alternative capital sources step in and redefine the opportunity. Is achieving scale, then, the clue for philanthropy to either evolve or exit? And, if so, do we need to rethink what we mean by 'philanthropy' for large organizations or proven initiatives in social markets?"

I quote Raymond's piece at length because it corroborates some of my own thinking on this subject. She rightly points out that the biggest advantage of philanthropic capital is its "ability to take significant risk, to seed a promising idea and recognize that all promising ideas can be failures."

So risk tolerance or tolerance for failure, playing on the field of ideas and at the edge of problems "where the probabilities of success are unknown, is the key playing field for philanthropy."

For many ideas, perhaps chief among them those addressing environmental issues, it may be time for other types of capital to be brought to bear. I'm particularly interested in what Raymond describes as "a multiplicity of approaches to organizational finance in the nonprofit sector...for self-reliance, sustainability, and (yes) profit" to come to the stage.

This is not far from what Lucy refers to as "tri-sector solutions," such as the B Corporation she has described or the bond purchase strategy Raymond describes in her piece. (In the latter, Raymond explains, "'Donors' took on the role of guarantor rather than funder, and the resources flowed at levels that donations would never have been able to sustain.")

Elsewhere in the web pages of onPhilanthropy, John Bloom of RSF Social Finance, posits that "social finance holds that the purpose of money and finance is to support human initiative and to foster the evolution of new community."

And, Bloom suggests, social finance recognizes "the human and environmental consequences of economic activities...[and] presents a picture of a healthier sustainable future -- and one that leaves behind the industrialist model of philanthropy..."

I will continue this dialogue here on The Green Skeptic, because I think it is an important one, and part of an ongoing, evolving thought process for me that started over four years ago and which led to this blog. Thanks to Lucy for calling me out about it and fostering this dialogue.

Pennsylvania Can Clean Up in Clean Tech

Kevin Brown, my co-founder of Cleantech Alliance Mid-Atlantic, says, "Pennsylvania can clean up in clean tech," in the Philadelphia Inquirer this weekend:

 Philadelphia identifies with underdogs: Rocky, the Eagles, and now energy.

When business people or policymakers think of Philly, they naturally jump to the Big Five: pharmaceuticals, higher education, legal, finance, and technology. Clean tech, or renewable energy, rarely makes the list. But that's about to change. We have the potential to be a full-fledged front-runner in one of the hottest growth industries.

Read the full story here.

Heavy Truck Fuel Efficiency: The Green Skeptic on FOX Business

I sat down with Charles Payne and the gang at Varney & Co on FOX Business yesterday to talk about Heavy Truck Fuel Efficiency Standards.  We had a lively conversation.

Here's the video:




And here's a link in case your browser doesn't support the viewer above: Green Skeptic on FOX Business

Clusterstuck: Are Industry Clusters Really the Holy Grail?

Image from Stinque.com

Last week's report by the Brookings Institution and Battelle Technologies on the clean economy was greeted with much fanfare.  I even wrote about how it ranked the Greater Philadelphia region (where I live) number 5 in the nation.

One of the key success factors the Brookings-Battelle study points to is the creation of industry hubs or clusters, such as the Greater Philadelphia Innovation Cluster for Energy Efficient Buildings. 

I was pleased to see the reference having been a fan and supporter of the GPIC effort.  (As founder of the business network, Cleantech Alliance Mid-Atlantic, I wrote a letter of support to the DOE for Philadelphia's initial application.)

But then I came across a Washington Post opinion piece by Vivek Wadhwa titled "Industry Clusters: The Modern-Day Snake Oil."   My skeptic bone, which is located just to the right of the funny bone, in case you are wondering, started to tingle.

Wadhwa points to a recent study conducted by Rune Dahl Fitjar, of Norway’s Centre for Innovation Research at the International Research Institute of Stavanger, and Andres Rodriguez-Pose of the London School of Economics and Political Science, which found that regional and national clusters are, in fact, "irrelevant for innovation."

Rather, Wadhwa relates, "the key drivers of innovation in Norway are the communication channels that local entrepreneurs maintain to the outside world and their open-mindedness toward foreign cultures, change and new ideas.  Companies that are 'regionally minded' -- that maintain ties only with players within the same cluster -- are four times less likely to innovate than the globally connected."
 
What do the researchers say is the determining factor for success?  People.

Not just any people: "knowledgeable people who have the motivation and ability to start ventures," writes Wadhwa.  Knowledgeable, risk-taking people who are connected by extensive information-sharing networks.

"The same dynamics at play in Norway give Silicon Valley its advantage," according to Wadhwa.  "It is a giant, globally connected network in which sharing information and risk-taking are the norm."

Rather than patting ourselves on our backs for developing clusters of innovation, we need to focus on people.  And we need to continuously ask the following questions:

• Do we have the right people and are we connecting them in ways that will help them start companies?  
• Are we connecting them with the right mentors and networks and access to financing?   
• Are we getting government out of the way of their success?  
• Are we making the pathways to commercialization clear and efficient enough to encourage repaid growth?

If not, we may be creating nothing more than a government-sponsored enduring clusterf*ck that will lead to nothing more than an academic exercise and more fodder for reports.

What We Need: Moderation, Innovation, and Entrepreneurial Solutions

On a late September morning I walked into the FOX Business studio in New York to sit down with host Stuart Varney and former EPA head Christine Todd Whitman. We were talking about why environmentalists seemed to be increasingly disgruntled as 2010 was coming to a close.

"The environmentalists were disappointed they didn't get all they wanted," I told Varney. "They thought they had a mandate with the president and Congress lined up."

"It's about over-reach and over-expectation," Governor Whitman agreed. "They want the perfect, and if they can't have the perfect they don't want to settle for anything."

Varney turned to me and asked, "Just for the record, you are an environmentalist?"

"Yes, but I'm a practical environmentalist," I answered.

Later in the segment, I expressed my concern that the environment had become a "left issue," pointing out that many of the strides made in protecting the environment had come from the Republican side, including the EPA, and the Clean Air and Water Acts.

"The environment is a universal issue. We all live in the environment. We all care about it," I offered. "But right now, the rhetoric is about panic, it's about crisis, and I don't think the American people are going to respond to that."

Governor Whitman and I share the opinion that we need a more moderate approach on the environment. One that understands what needs to be done and is practical and pragmatic, and doesn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

I left the studio and went over to the Sheraton New York Hotel and Towers, where I was attending the Clinton Global Initiative, the annual gathering of leaders from government, business, and civil society around the world.

The day before, Sir Richard Branson, founder of Virgin Group was in conversation with José María Figueres, former president of Costa Rica. He talked about the need for putting aside the issue of climate change and about investing in clean energy innovation and entrepreneurs.

"Put the idea of whether global warming is real aside," said Sir Richard. "Recognize that we are depleting resources. Demand for oil in 5 years will exceed supply. Even in the recession, the demand for oil hardly dropped. Energy is critical for society, so the demand for clean energy will be enormous. We must invest in alternative fuels."

Innovative alternative fuels like that being developed by one of the start-ups I'd been working with in Philadelphia, BlackGold Biofuels.

Emily Landsburg, BlackGold's CEO, is using a patent-pending technology that turns sewer grease from a municipal pain into a profitable biodiesel product.

Last summer, in an effort to demonstrate how the technology works, BlackGold and researchers from the U.S. Department of Agriculture turned a hunk of solid fat into biodiesel.

They melted an 800-pound butter sculpture of Ben Franklin that would otherwise go to waste, strained off the water, and added methanol. The chemical bonded to the end of the chains of fatty acids in the lard, which could then be refined into fuel suitable for most diesel engines.

With their first installation in place at a water treatment facility in San Francisco, BlackGold will generate fuel for that city’s bus fleet not from butter, but from sewage fats that now plague municipal systems.

The innovation won accolades from San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsome, who said the project "will break new ground toward accessible, sustainable energy and serve as a model for the entire state and the country."

Moderation, innovation, efficiency, and entrepreneurial solutions. That's what we need more of if we want to turn our economy around.

RIVERFIRST Project Considered River's Needs in Minneapolis

"What if we looked at the river's needs first?" asked Sheila Kennedy, the architect and designer in a telephone interview. "Our thinking was what's good for the river has got to be good for people and economic growth, if it can be handled sustainably."

The RIVERFIRST Project, led by the Tom Leader Studio (TLS) and Kennedy & Violich Architecture, Ltd. (KVA MATx), was selected today as the winner of the Next Generation of Parks Design Competition for the Minneapolis Riverfront.

View of Knot Bridge and Scherer Park looking North

The sponsors, including the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board and the Minneapolis Parks Foundation, along with creative partners the University of Minnesota College of Design and the Walker Art Center, called for proposals that developed "new opportunities for connectivity, sustainability, infrastructure, and public space" along a stretch of Mississippi riverfront through the heart of the city.

Invited design teams included STOSS of Cambridge, MA, the Ken Smith Group from New York, and Turenscape of Beijing. (You can see all finalists' presentations at: Minneapolis Riverfront Design.)

TLA/KVA's RIVERFIRST stood out, according to jury-member David Fisher, Superintendent Emeritus of the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board.

"The team grounded their proposal in proactive outreach to the community, demonstrated extensive research, and posited several multi-layered solutions unique to these 11 miles of riverfront and the habitat, communities, businesses, infrastructure, and culture intrinsic to our region," Fisher said.

Some of the river reaches have been in bad shape for years, others started to make a comeback in the wake of regulations that cleaned up industrial practices along the river in the 1970s.

Still, there are impacts from melting snow and ice carrying street salts, homeowners using phosphate-laden dishwashing detergent in the watershed, and storm water runoff.

TLA/KVA and its partners conducted a comprehensive storm water management plan for the city, including opening up and day-lighting water in pipes that feed into the river, according to Kennedy of KVA.

The team then designed plantings to act as a natural water treatment facility, including wetland plants and trees that are native to the Upper Mississippi floodplain, such as weeping willows, cedars, and cottonwoods.

"We also wanted to change the way people interact with the river," said Kennedy. "Especially in reaches that had previously not allowed pedestrian access."

The need for greater connectivity, perspective, and access led to the creation of a series of rising berms providing an overlook of the river, and a mobile app and solar-powered Wi-Fi network called "River Talk," which allows for an interactive experience of the river's ecology along strategic points.

Real-time water monitoring from the Minnesota USGS website will be made available via energy-efficient illumination along Knot Bridge linking the Northeast Arts District with the proposed River City Innovation District and Downtown.

"The idea is to link physical bridge connections -- between the west and east sides of the river -- with connectivity to the digital world," Kennedy related.

"The Project is a big responsibility," she said. "We tried to take it seriously, but more to the point, we tried to imagine the river as a municipal ecosystem services provider."

What RIVERFIRST will provide when the project is completed, is reclamation of the river for the communities of Minneapolis, one that matches the needs its people with the river.

(Images courtesy of KVA MATx)

Green Skeptic Friday LinkFest - 02/04/11

NOAA/NASA GOES Project

Going to extremes this week -- from Florida, where it was in the 70s-80s to Philly and ice, ice baby...

The storm that rocked the Central Midwestern US and Northeast missed us, but would you look at that satellite image (at right)?

Here are some links for this week:

Katie Fehrenbacher of Earth2Tech asks, Are Consumers Ready for Home Energy Management in 2011?

John Thackara, writing in Design Observer, suggests WWF's Energy Report takes "global energy needs" as a given, but ignores the true costs of deploying renewable energy infrastructure: Renewable Energy: Salvation or Snake Oil?

The BBC's environment reporter Richard Black has a look at a Nature Conservancy report published in the journal BioScience and finds "one of the starkest conclusions I've seen about humanity's relationship with the oceans"..."Globally, 85% of oyster beds have basically disappeared.": Oysters clear seas for local remedies.

Teryn Norris of Americans for Energy Leadership catalogs The Rise of Innovation Hawks.

FrumForum's David Frum takes on Obama's 'China Envy.'

And, finally, you must read Umair Haque's "Ten Things You're Not Allowed to Say at Davos."

Have a great weekend!

Six Years of The Green Skeptic

Six years ago today I launched The Green Skeptic as a blog devoted to challenging assumptions about how we live on the earth and protect our environment.

It's been fun and I'm cooking up a lot of changes for my 7th inning ahead.

For the 5th anniversary last year, I wrote:

People often ask me why I'm skeptical and what I'm skeptical about.

Well, the answer is, I believe that skepticism is a hallmark of human nature. Without it, we are sheep.

I think we need to constantly challenge our assumptions about the way the world works or how others tell us it works. We must question even what our leaders tell us, regardless of what side of the aisle their derriere rests upon or what side of the issue they claim to represent...

...So, I'll remain a skeptic and try to stop the bleating where I can.

I am neither a climate skeptic nor a climate denier, but I do believe the rhetoric on both sides is spoiling our chances to achieve true prosperity through innovation.

We need to stop all the bleating and blathering and get on with a new agenda for our economy, a new green economy that balances technological progress and environmental impact.

As my pal Andy Swan says, we need "a 'green' that embraces the technological efficiencies that can make our world more productive and cleaner while concurrently lowering the barriers to entry for persons and businesses requiring energy to succeed."

Succeed. Innovation. Prosperity.

Sensing a theme here?

Ultimately, my skepticism about the way "we live on the earth and protect our environment" all gets back to making our world a better place -- a better place for all of us to thrive and grow and, to use one of Andy's favorite words, win.

Thanks for reading; I hope to continue to provide value for the next seven years.

Related articles

• How the BBC gave free rein to global warming deniers during 'climategate' (liberalconspiracy.org)
• Climate Change: Study Says Dire Warnings Fuel Skepticism (time.com)
• Philosophy Word of the Day - Skeptical Theism (greatcloud.wordpress.com)
• Can you count the straw men about skepticism? (scienceblogs.com)
• Climate-Change Strategy: Be Afraid - but Only a Little (time.com)

Cleantech Innovation in China: Insights from the Cleantech Group

The Future of Cleantech?

Today, "Made in China" increasingly means innovated in China.  So argues a new report from the Cleantech Group released last week, "Cleantech Innovation in China."

China became the world’s largest cleantech investor in 2009, pumping government investment into R&D and innovation incubators, but also attracting an increasing share of private money, as well as interest from the global marketplace.

According to the report, however, Chinese companies still need to rely on multinational corporations from other countries with a tradition of cleantech innovation and expansion for their success. This points to some potential opportunity for US-based companies.

In addition, China faces increased resource constraints and troublesome levels of pollution, water shortages, population growth, and other environmental risks that may hinder its progress over the long-term.

"Energy insecurity and poor environmental quality are threats," according to the report. "And addressing them is not only a key factor in managing the risk of domestic discontent but also a prime opportunity to create local jobs and develop local expertise."

Key points of interest  to readers of The Green Skeptic:

• Patent filing in China grew 29.7% in 2009, bucking the unprecedented decline in global patent filings due to the global economic crisis. China is now 4th in the world in patent origin in six key clean technologies including wind, biomass, and cleaner coal.
• The Chinese government has increased R&D spending while decentralizing R&D institutions and encouraging partnerships with the private sector, preparing China to be especially competitive in the world market. 
• China is innovating beyond the solar sector. 70% of cleantech venture capital deals between 2006 and 2009 were outside of solar. Materials science, agriculture, water and wastewater, energy storage and energy efficiency have emerged as key areas of interest.
• For the first time, in 2009, China accounted for the largest share of money raised from cleantech IPOs (69%), well ahead of the US’s 26%.  By number of deals China also had the majority with 17 of the 32 global cleantech IPOs tracked in 2009. Of the current crop of Cleantech IPOs on the ChiNext exchange in 2010, many are from water and energy storage.

We agree with the authors of the report that "China’s level of cleantech innovation today should not be over-inflated," but neither should its potential be underestimated.

As the report suggests, "the question is no longer whether a China strategy should be adopted for cleantech innovation, but rather how it should be adopted."

Download a copy of the report summary here.

Related articles by Zemanta

• 10 Reasons Why China is the Cleantech Leader (solarfeeds.com)
• Why China has already overtaken the U.S. in cleantech (cleantechblog.com)
• Terry Cooke on China, Cleantech and US Readiness (thegreenskeptic.com)
• Will China Eat Our Cleantech Lunch? (xconomy.com)

Top 10 Reasons Israel is a Cleantech Leader

David Buimovitch/AFP/Getty Images

Here at The Green Skeptic we've been following the progress of cleantech in Israel for some time.

There are many reasons Israel has been an innovator, including, in part, because it has to be. Now, Sustainable World Capital's Shawn Lesser highlights the history of innovation, access to capital, scarce resources and other factors propelling cleantech today in Israel.

Here are the Top 10 Reasons Israel is a cleantech leader:

1. Israel is the Silicon Valley of water. Relative to its small size, Israel has devoted more resources to the development of waste water treatment and reclamation than any other country in the world. Seventy percent of its waste water is recycled, three times the figure of number two: Spain. Israel is the birthplace and world leader in drip irrigation, which has literally turned deserts into farmlands. The Israeli firm Netafim, a $500 million high-tech drip-irrigation giant, is a world leader in smart irrigation technology and has been credited with starting the drip irrigation revolution. Israel Newtech, which promotes Israeli clean energy and water technologies, has identified hundreds of water companies. It’s estimated that Israel’s water industry was valued at $1.4 billion in 2008 and could reach $2.5 billion by 2011.

2. Brain trust. Israel has the highest ratio of university degrees to population in the world. Within its small borders is an enormous concentration of PhDs and engineers, bolstered in large part by the large immigration from the former Soviet Union. This concentration of minds in a relatively small geographical space creates a country-wide incubator where ideas are constantly tested in the coffee shops of Tel-Aviv and the hallways of universities. 

3. Necessity as the mother of innovation. Due to its location and terrain, Israel is a country that has had extremely limited natural resources since its inception. Israelis have therefore become experts at getting the most out of limited natural resources. Confronting adversity has trained Israelis to think outside of the box. “Israel is poor in natural resources and rich in brain capital. Clean energy bridges that gap. What Israel lacks in the ground it makes up with its people,” says David Anthony from 21 Ventures.

4. Leveraging tech expertise to cleantech. “Israel’s tech sector has flourished through the creation of core technology competencies that are world leading,” as Glen Schwaber, Partner at Israel Cleantech Ventures, wrote in his article “The Quest for Smarts.”

“Israel’s tech sector has flourished through the creation of core technology competencies that are world leading,” according to Schwaber. These include, but are not limited to digital printing, semiconductors, power electronics, optics and software. Over the last two decades, multiple billions of VC dollars have poured into Israeli companies in these sectors, market leaders have emerged, and many of the world’s largest multinationals have bought companies and set up shop in Israel as a result.” 

5. Capital. Just about every major US VC firm in Silicon Valley, from Battery Ventures to Greylock to USVP to Sequoia Capital, is prospecting across Israel for cleantech investments. All told, at least 40 venture funds, several of them American, manage more than $10 billion in Israel, with an increasing share of their allocations devoted to cleantech companies. 

6. The Better Place Factor. Better Place is Israel’s best known cleantech company, and it recently raised a further $350 million (see Better Place deal bested by Airtricity). Founded by Israeli entrepreneur Shai Agassi, the company is developing electric vehicle battery swapping infrastructure. 

7. The sun shines brightly over Israel. The solar radiation Israel receives is a driver of solar thermal companies. Siemens bought Israeli solar thermal pioneer Solel for $418 million, while BrightSource Energy has raised more than $160 million from investors, including U.S.-based VantagePoint Venture Partners, Google, BP’s investment arm, Morgan Stanley, and JPMorgan Chase. Other notable solar thermal companies include Heliofocus, ZenithSolar, and AORA. 

8. Kibbutz Pioneers. The foundation of Israel’s cleantech industry was laid with the beginning of the kibbutz (collective communities) movement at the start of the 20th century (see Israel’s cleantech kibbutzim pioneers). At that time, the land was mostly semi-arid, with a scarcity of water and pockmarked by mosquito infested swamps, so principles of sustainability and self-sufficiency were adopted from the outset so as to “make the desert bloom”. 

9. Home grown Israeli VC community. Israel has a vibrant local VC community which includes Israel Cleantech Ventures, AquaAgro and Terra Ventures—three firms dedicated to investing in Israel’s cleantech sector. Having a vibrant local VC community also draws foreign money.

10. Momentum. Israel is fast becoming the cleantech incubator to the world. In proportion to its population, it now has the largest number of startup companies than any other country in the world except the U.S., with 3,500 companies, mostly in hi-tech. Exciting new cleantech startups to keep an eye on, in our opinion, that haven’t been mentioned already include Bio Pure Technology, BioPetroClean, CellEra, Emefcy, Enstorage, Greenlet Technologies, GreenRoad, GreenSun Energy, IQ Wind, Linum, Panoramic Power, Phoebus Energy, SolarEdge, Takadu, Technospin, Transalgae and Variable Wind Solutions.

As Al Gore siad in a recent visit to Israel, “the people of Israel can lead the way to renewable energy. With its unique geographical position, and cleantech know how, Israel is a natural leader in the field.”

Cleantech could well become Israel’s biggest export market. Other countries should take note.

Clean Tech: Biomimicry May Unlock the Power of Solar

"In a revolutionary leap that could transform solar power from a marginal, boutique alternative into a mainstream energy source, MIT researchers have overcome a major barrier to large-scale solar power: storing energy for use when the sun doesn't shine."

Read the full story by Anne Trafton from MIT and watch Dan Nocera's video description: http://tinyurl.com/5uu53h

Click To Play

(Composed on BlackBerry; UPDATED with embedded video content.)

Clean Tech: KPMG, AlwaysOn and Vator.tv Launches Online Competition

Readers of The Green Skeptic know how much we like online competitions. Here's an innovative approach from KPMG's venture unit, AlwaysOn, and Vator.tv

They are looking for game-changing players in the clean tech industry. Check out the intro video:




As with all the Vator.tv/AlwaysOn winners, the founder or executive of the winning business plan will be invited to present at the AlwaysOn Going Green in September 2008.

At the event, the winner will have the opportunity to give a six-minute CEO pitch to an audience of AlwaysOn investors and attendees. They will also be featured in AO’s quarterly print "blogozine" and on the Vator.tv and AlwaysOn websites.

KPMG is a global network of professional firms who operate in 145 countries and have more than 123,000 professionals working in member firms around the world. KMPG's purpose is to turn knowledge into value for the benefit of their clients.

Changemakers: Vote for Winners in Geotourism Challenge

As previously mentioned on this blog, Ashoka's Changemakers and National Geographic (link) have teamed up for a competition they call The Geotourism Challenge: Celebrating Places/Changing Lives.

A panel of judges, including Keith Bellows, VP of National Geographic Society and Editor-in-Chief NG Traveler; Susan Berresford, Past President of The Ford Foundation; Leonard Cordiner, CEO of whl travel; and Nachiket Mor, President of ICICI Foundation for Inclusive Growth, has picked a handful -- 3 handfuls actually -- of finalists from among the 323 entries submitted from 84 countries. Now it's up to the changemaking (kingmaking?) public to decide the winners.

To vote, click over to Geotourism Challenge and vote for your favorite.

But hurry: Voting ends June 11 at 6PM EST.

For the complete list of entires, visit Changemakers.

And the nominees are:

Exotica Cottages, Dominica
Rios Tropicales Lodge, Costa Rica
Tourism Board Bhutan, Bhutan
Crete's Culinary Sanctuaries, Greece
Canopus Maldives - MPO for WHL in Maldives
Blue Ventures Conservation, Madagascar
Eco-Health Farms, Latvia
Snow Leopard Conservancy India Trust, India
Wildlife Conservation Society, Gabon
3 Sisters Adventure Trekking, Nepal
Evason Phuket & Six Senses Spa, Thailand
CC Africa, South Africa
Great Baikal Trail, Russia
Chumba Island Coral Park, Ltd., Tanzania

[Disclosure: The author is a vice president with Ashoka, but does not work directly for Changemakers or National Geographic, although he has friends at both organizations and admires their work.]

Social Entrepreneurs: New Ventures' Call for SME Business Plans

This from Ella Delio of NextBillion.net - Development Through Enterprise:

Do you run a small-to-medium size enterprise operating in India, Indonesia, China, Brazil or Mexico? Does your company have an innovative business model that delivers strong environmental and social benefits? Are you seeking debt or equity capital in order to grow your business?

If so, apply for the New Ventures program in these countries. The New Ventures program of the World Resources Institute supports the growth of businesses that deliver social and environmental benefits by providing business advisory services and access to capital. Enterprises that have been supported by New Ventures have raised US$120M in capital. Moreover, 98% of New Ventures enterprises are still in operation.

The application deadlines for each country are:

• India: May 15th
• Indonesia: May 16th
• Mexico: June 30th
• China: TBD
• Brazil: TBD
  

For more information and access to the application form, please visit the specific country websites. For an English language version of the Indonesia application form, please contact slall@wri.org.

Innovation: "Green Pathways Out of Poverty," Jones Tells Aspen Environment Forum

The Green Skeptic likes to talk about the New Green Economy. For a long time, I've been nattering on about how America needs to get its act together and seize the opportunity of the a new, greener economy. We snooze; we lose.

China, India, even old rivals Japan and Germany, are poised to take the lead in every major part of clean tech and alternative energy development.

What's at stake? Plenty. Only a multibillion, some say, multitrillion dollar business opportunity.

But at the Aspen Environment Forum last Saturday, Van Jones and Majora Carter reminded us what else is at stake -- and what seizing this opportunity could mean for America.

It could mean, to paraphrase Van Jones, founder of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, moving from an economy of pollution and incarceration to one of solutions and green jobs.

Jones, along with Majora Carter, founder of Sustainable South Bronx, called on the crowd -- and are calling on the rest of America too -- to help them launch "Green for All," a kind of green job corps for those currently left on the margins.

"FDR had the Civilian Conservation Corps, with young people going all over America to enhance and build parks," Jones told the crowd in Aspen. "JFK had the Peace Corps, and Clinton had AmeriCorps. It's time we had a Green Job Corps."

The green-collar job sector is growing in the United States and could include more than 14 million workers by 2017 industry, according to some analysts.

The American Solar Energy Society says there are there are potentially 8.5 million U.S. jobs that can be considered "green." That figure could grow by 5 million in the next 10 years, Jerome Ringo of the Apollo Alliance told Steven Greenhouse of The New York Times in an article last week.

Green-collar jobs include "Ph.D.'s and Ph.-do's," said Jones. "We need people who are highly educated at the theoretical level and we need people who are highly educated at the level of skilled labor."

At least 28 US states have chartered mandates pushing for renewable energy to be 10 to 25 percent of their energy portfolio over the next few decades.

"The development of a green economy creates a broad new set of opportunities," Lois Quam, managing director for alternative investments at Piper Jaffray, told the Times.

"When I first started looking at this area," Quam said. "Many people commented on how this will be as big as the Internet. But this is so much bigger than the Internet. The only comparable example we can find is the Industrial Revolution. It will affect every business and every industry."

Jones calls such jobs "green pathways out of poverty."

"Right now we don't have the infrastructure to train a sufficient number of green-collar workers," Jones told the Times. "If we are going to weatherize buildings, they have to be weatherized here. If you put up solar panels, you can't ship a building to Asia and have them put the solar panels on and ship it back. These jobs have to be done in the United States."

Read the Times article: Green Jobs

Check out the "Green For All" presentation from the Aspen Environment Forum 2008: (Clip 1) with Majora Carter, Van Jones. Watch video.
(Clip 2) Watch video.
(Clip 3) Watch video.