I've been wondering when people would recognize the economic potential of sustainable technology and sustainable policy. I hesitate to call it green because that label has an "on the fringe" connotation. But this wave of enthusiasm over environmental consciousness really is green - green as a leaf, and green as a dollar bill.
Entrepreneurs, investors who fund them, government bodies, traditional industries especially the automobile and energy sectors, and of course the media have been drooling over climate change, hybrid cars, alternative fuels, wind energy.. you name it. That's why Newsweek and the Economist devoted an entire issue to the topic recently, and why investors are lining up to put their money into alternative energy companies.
I am not an expert but I see many causes for the recent excitement. One is oil prices, which before coming down recently have gone up for much of 2006. Two, scientists are presenting more convincing evidence of climate change than ever. Three, the weather this winter is really messed up. In Japan ducks are mating thinking it is spring. Four, energy exporting countries are increasingly using their "black gold" to political effect. Especially Russia has forced higher prices on its neighbours and then cut off the oil supply if they don't comply. Europe and North America are starting to realize energy independence is a national security issue, and they want to develop domestic sources of energy. The number five reason - Al Gore and his movie.
Finally, the public has shown interest in it. In Canada, citizens have flatly rejected the ruling governments proposed Clean Air bill, and criticized Prime Minister Steven Harper for renegading on Kyoto. They even forced him to sack the federal environment minister. In America the new Democratic congress is preoccupied with war, but they will be much more open to the green revolution. England, Japan, some American states, and some other countries are hammering out a system of trade-able carbon permits. This is a change from traditional regulation, and the business community will be more likely to go along if they can save money by selling unused carbon quotas.
"Yes, Canada will cut mega-tonnes of emissions, but we will also make mega-tonnes of money"
Here is where Canada comes in. Stephen Dion, the new liberal party leader, also happens to be the former environmental minister under Paul Martin. He has come out swinging in the last few days with ambitious speeches in Alberta and Ontario about how going "green" will benefit Canada's overall economy. I think he is right on the mark.
And when people stop hearing gloomy stories from the traditionally strong manufacturing sectors, who will stand to lose the most from something like the Kyoto protocol, they can start listening to the likes of Al Gore and Stephen Dion and ME who say "Yeah, we will lose in this sector, but we will gain in so much in this sector, and that sector, and in areas that don't even have sectors yet. And overall, these areas offer the largest potential for growth because they are untapped, or not yet understood".
Take for example wind energy. It the most developed technology of the new energy bunch, and it has already been around for a while, but now it is really hot. I hear there is a shortage blades to outfit turbines. How about ethanol? Farmers are increasing the amount of land for growing it. Ford just made a huge investment in that technology (although at the expense of hybrid technology). Solar? Al Gore envisions the energy grid decentralizing to the point where individual households will be connected to small, community power grids. There they will be able to buy from it, or sell into the grid from their own household power production, be that through photovoltaic cells on their roofs, of a wind turbine in their yards.
What Kyoto would do for Canada, I believe is shift the economy away from some areas and into new ones. But overall (which is what really matters) the economy could expand greatly. In fact, Newsweek compared this energy boom to the internet bubble of the 90's, except the potential for profit is a lot clearer with energy than it was with the internet.
That's energy, but is there a market in the idea of sustainability, of eco-consciousness? For years already companies have been going googoo to place themselves under the umbrella of sustainability. The term has been hoared around by oil companies for a long time (kind of like hunters calling themselves conservationists). I don't know of any actual credible association that certifies companies as sustainable, but there are a bunch of products that carry green stickers to show they are efficient. I think this idea can be expanded to make it marketable in the way brand names are marketable. Public acceptance of sustainability will mean consumers will be willing to pay a higher price for goods which have been certified as environmentally friendly, or produced in a sustainable way. This is already happening with organic goods. Businesses invest a lot to be able to affix the 'organic' label to their products. Why not the same with 'climate friendly' or 'no carbon was burned in the production of this product'. We may just see a label like that in the future.
The only people who need to come on board now are the politicians. They always seem to be last. Stephen Dion, welcome on board.
