CleanTech.Org

Following on the success of the launch of Viridis Africa 2011, where more than 20 major investment opportunities were presented to prospective investors, Viridis Africa is now soliciting business plans in the clean tech industry from entrepreneurs seeking funding to turn their projects to account.

Viridis Africa as its name suggests in Latin, is about investment into "green" sustainable technologies and projects, presented by entrepreneurs and corporates who are seeking funding to introduce clean technology solutions and services.

Principals who would present their business opportunities at this clean technology venture capital, private equity and debt financing event would have the audience of numerous local and foreign investors, stratified according to their sectoral interest and investment criteria.

This year Viridis Africa will introduce foreign companies who wish to deploy their technology solutions encapsulated into regional commercial ventures, seeking local business partners and co-investors.

It is expected that numerous parties from USA, Europe, China, and India will be attending the event to obtain a firsthand overview of clean tech opportunities in the region.

Investors would include venture capital, private equity, project and corporate finance outfits and private investors focused in environmental technologies. They would also include international funding agencies, major Asian industrial conglomerates, technology specific investment funds and major companies who seek strategic alliance and acquisitions.

The following are some of the clean tech sub-sectors in which principals may consider their company or clean tech initiative being presented:

·         Clean Energy Generation: Wind, solar, hydro, biofuels, geothermal, clean coal technologies

·         Storage: Fuel cells, advanced batteries, hybrid systems

·         Infrastructure: Management, transmission

·         Efficiency: Building efficiency, smart grids, waste heat recovery

·         Water & waste water: Water treatment, water conservation, waste water treatment, desalination

·         Recycling & waste: Recycling, waste treatment, organic matter, plastics

Presenters will have the opportunity to introduce their investment case to interested parties throughout the lifecycle of their business, i.e. from conceptual, early stage / startup through to established business.

The event will also introduce parties with complementary technologies and business models to one another to explore mutually beneficial opportunities.

In the main the conference and its exhibition will endeavour to bring about a vibrant “market platform” for entrepreneurs and corporates to propose and conclude investment deals with funders. 

Although the event is to be held once a year, it is designed to give the participants long term continuity vis a vis  the provision of web-based interaction platforms, inducing social networks such as the Sub-Saharan Africa Sustainable Energy group  on Linkedin.com.

In addition it is intended to hold Viridis Africa within individual countries in Africa, as and when greater interest and support is gained in a particular country.

The deadline for business proposal submission is 30th of August 2012 and should be forwarded to suza@viridisafrica.com.

An executive business summary of the proposed clean tech technology, project or company is required in order for the organiser, Spindle Communications, to match the business proposal with the appropriate theme and funders. Importantly participants need to indicate the funds they seek and the principal terms for investors’ participation.

Visit www.viridisafrica.com for more information.

Bamboo is a tropical plant species that grow at tremendous speeds. Incidentally the utilization of available species for Engineered products and Bio based materials would be an appropriate CLEANTECH manufacturing. Here is a new interesting Development of Bamboo Mat based Composite for Boat construction:


Bambo Mat system being Woven around a Template for Dinghy


Fully Shaped Bamboo Mat Woven Dinghy Design


The bamboo Mat Woven Dinghy being hybridized with Glass-Composite Skin


The Fully Hybridized "SKIN-COMPOSITE" Bamboo-Mat System Dinghy


Checking Buoyancy and Balance


The Finished "Ready-for-SEAWORTHY" Trial Bamboo-Mat Molded Dinghy


The Bamboo-Mat Hybrid Molded Dinghy Taking a First SEA RIDE

The material system was seen to be excellent for MONOCOQUE body Constructions ... and it is being planned to design and fabricate Automobile Body as well as Lightweight Aircraft.

Please visit the following sites for more details:

1. http://agrobiogenicscleantechpvtltd.com/new-technology/

2. http://agrobiogenicscleantechpvtltd.com/lightweight-aircraft/

3. http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/70223/Optimized-Engineering-Materials-Through-Cleantech

4. http://agrobiogenicscleantechpvtltd.com/technology/

Certain Technical Details on material property comparisons are available here:

http://zerowastezerocarbon.wordpress.com/2011/08/07/environmentally-neutral-engineering-composites-for-boats-and-aircrafts/

......

Dear all,

Exclusive $300 Members Discount to Upcoming Cleantech Forum in San Francisco and Register to Win a Free Pass!

There are two don't miss conferences in cleantech each year, one put on by IBF & Clean Edge, and the other in both Spring and Fall by the Cleantech Group. We brought you a members discount to the CleanTech Investor Summit by Clean Edge last month.

This month we are excited to bring you the best discount available to the Cleantech Forum:

$300 discount to the Cleantech Forum, on March 14-16 ion San Francisco. It's the largest and best known of all the cleantech conferences, with more investment capital present than at any other.

Use our exclusive members only discount code:

CFSFCTORG

http://info.cleantech.com/SFForum_CleantechBlog.html

+

One lucky Cleantech.org Registrant will win a free pass, a $2,495 value!

Regards,

Neal Dikeman
Chairman
Cleantech.org

The Hidden Cleantech Revolution: Five Priorities for Securing America's Energy Future -- without Breaking the Bank
By John Moore and Toby Shute 

 

Free full-text download available at http://hiddencleantech.com/

The most difficult aspect of our society's energy challenge for most people to grasp is the sheer scale of energy demand, the massive investment sunk into existing infrastructure, and the timeframe required for substantive change.  In thinking about the evolution of energy technology, most of us are thus subject to the classic error articulated by futurologist Paul Saffo: confusing a clear view of the future with a short distance.

Seeking to avoid that trap, The Hidden Cleantech Revolution: Five Priorities for Securing America's Energy Future -- without Breaking the Bank, a slim volume written by Acorn Energy CEO John Moore and Motley Fool energy analyst Toby Shute, focuses not on long-term breakthrough technologies or future regulatory changes, but rather on immediate opportunities for modest improvements.  By changing the inflection of the energy productivity curve right now, the authors argue, we can reap large cumulative impacts over time.  It's the miracle of compound interest translated from financial to energy planning.

That's why Moore and Shute talk about a "hidden cleantech revolution" --  some of the innovations they highlight are hidden in plain sight, overlooked because individually they are not game-changers, not exciting new technology, not disruptive.  But from the perspective of entrepreneurs and investors, energy and utility executives, or regulators and environmental policy-makers, these innovations in the aggregate have the potential to make a huge difference within the next decade.

And that's the driving energy behind this refreshingly brief, clear, and focused volume -- the authors want to make sure that potential near-term improvements and economic gains are not left in the shadows, while unwarranted attention is lavished on unproven or uneconomic technologies that might have an impact in the future.  As the authors stress, "Hope is not a strategy."

Moore and Shute leverage their deep experience with the real world of energy innovation to highlight a range of opportunities that can improve our existing energy infrastructure, production and distribution processes, largely through the application of information technology.  IT has already driven revolutionary change in industry after industry, but as yet has had little penetration in energy.  I especially like the references to Kevin Kelly's ideas about the "internet of things," that is, creating more effective and responsive systems by interconnecting and adding intelligence to the existing world of isolated 'dumb' devices like those making up our electrical grid or oil and gas pipelines.

The focus on wringing near-term improvements out of our existing infrastructure is clearly reflected in the structure of the book, which is organized around five strategic 'national priorities': 

• Getting more from the Grid
• Getting more from Oil and Gas
• Getting more from Coal
• Getting more from Nuclear
• Safety, Security, and Resilience

Notably missing is the usual discussion of such high-profile topics as bioenergy, solar, wind, or electric vehicles.  Not that the authors don't think these topics are important for the future, just that unresolved technical, economic, and regulatory issues drive higher risk and longer lead times for deployment at scale.  On the other hand, as their fifth National Priority indicates, they pay more attention than usual to opportunities associated with extending the life of our aging and vulnerable infrastructure.

Their focus on realistic short-term opportunities puts the authors on the same wavelength as Stuart Brand in his recent Whole Earth Discipline,  which emphasizes "ecopragmatist" solutions, or Robert Bryce in Power Hungry, with his 'N2N' (or natural gas to nuclear) policy.  The emerging consensus, as I see it, is that we need to become tougher and more hard-nosed in thinking about how to make immediate progress on every front possible, at the same time that we encourage visionary long-term approaches to changing the status quo.

One of the best features of the book is its simple rating system for the near-term potential of the various opportunities examined.  For each technology, the authors examine its potential to improve how clean, safe, reliable, and affordable our energy production and distribution systems are.  They then weight the result both by the extent to which the technology is already proven, and how widespread its deployment within the next 10 years could be.  A small table makes these ratings explicit at the head of each relevant chapter.

Though the precision of these energy impact ratings is low, the trade-off is that they are clear and transparent, suitable for comparative discussion and debate.  And they work well enough to highlight some counter-intuitive results, such as:

• Some 'killer apps' that have garnered attention for their long-term potential, such as smart-meter deployment and grid-scale batteries, get extremely low scores for near-term value due to their current economics or technical maturity.
• Some 'hidden' opportunities that most people have never heard about, such as computer modeling for vegetation management in electrical transmission right-of-ways, or mega-project management software for nuclear plant construction, get very high marks due to the potential for widespread and economic implementation right now.

My favorite example was what the authors called 'the seeing bit.'  By using high-speed down-hole communications in concert with real-time seismic modeling, drilling accuracy can be improved enough to drive an estimated 15% improvement in oil recovery from existing fields.  A classic transformation of capabilities arising from the synergy of many small innovations, enabled by improved IT to tie them all together.

As the authors point out, knowledge is power -- literally!  Our current energy infrastructure is so enormous and so inefficient, that knowledge, in the form of improved IT and near-term cleantech developments, can provide us with more new usable power than any comparable brute force investment in basic capacity.  And collectively, these near-term improvements can start changing our energy productivity trend line now.

Would love to hear members thoughts on their top prediction for cleantech in 2011

Who IPOs?
What happens with climate change policy after Cancun?
Where do oil prices go?
What's the next big thing in cleantech?
Etc.


My 5 cleantech wishes for 2011

It is noted that each ton of Biomass (based on vegetation systems + non-toxic animal organic matter) could generate about 100 Kg of Bio-petrochemicals. Please see illustrations below:

The estimated non-forest and non-oceanic Biomass (Renewable) resources in the world are about 500 billion T. These are annually renewable “green weight” that include about 77% moisture. Nearly 75% of these biomass are generated in the Tropics. Thus, the Tropics account for a total of not less than 375 billion Tons (“green weight”) of non-forest (non-oceanic) biomass generation. If we were to convert just 33% of all of these Tropical biomass into Bio-petrochemicals, the total Bio-petrochemicals produced in the Tropics alone would be a whopping 3 billion T. This is about 70% of the entire world productions/ consumptions, at present! Of the total 4.2 billion T petrochemicals used up in the world the United States alone consumes nearly 24% (= 1 billion T). A country like India would be able to produce not less than 250 million tons of bio-petrochemicals (when India now consumes about 45 million T of fossil based petrochemicals, which is about 18% of the Bio-petrochemicals potentials!)

What do we infer from the analyses above? Essentially, we arrive at the fact that Biomass based Bio-petrochemicals are the answer to the world's petrochemicals needs.

TABLE OF BIO-PETROCHEMICAL POTENTIALS OF NATIONS
@ 1/10th OF THE AVAILABLE RENEWABLE VEGETATION RESOURCES

Country	Climate Zone	Population	Area (sq km)	1/10th CVRR (T)	Bio-petrochemicals	Rank
China	Temperate	1, 341, 000, 000	9, 561, 000	2, 390, 250, 000	239, 025, 000 T	3
India	Tropical	1, 191, 050, 000	3, 287, 260	1, 972, 356, 000	197, 235, 600 T	5
US	Temperate	310, 851, 000	9, 372, 000	2, 343, 000, 000	234, 300, 000 T	4
Indonesia	Equatorial	237, 556, 360	1, 904, 000	1, 428, 000, 000	142, 800, 000 T	7
Brazil	Equatorial	190, 732, 700	8, 511, 000	6, 383, 250, 000	638, 325, 000 T	1
Pakistan	Semi-tropical	171, 229, 000	796, 000	238, 800, 000	23, 880, 000 T	14
Nigeria	Tropical	158, 259, 000	924, 000	554, 400, 000	55, 440, 000 T	9
Bangladesh	Tropical	149, 626, 000	148, 000	88, 800, 000	8, 880, 000 T	18
Russia	Semi-Torrid	141, 927, 297	17, 075, 000	2, 561, 250, 000	256, 125, 000 T	2
Japan	Temperate	127, 390, 000	378, 000	94, 500, 000	9450, 000 T	19
Mexico	Tropical	112, 322, 757	1, 972, 000	1, 183, 200, 000	118, 320, 000 T	8
Philippines	Tropical	94, 013, 200	299, 000	179, 400, 000	17, 940, 000 T	17
Vietnam	Tropical	85, 846, 997	329, 000	197, 400, 000	19, 740, 000 T	15
Germany	Temperate	81, 802, 000	357, 000	89, 250, 000	8, 925, 000 T	20
Ethiopia	Tropical (dry)	79, 455, 630	1, 221, 000	366, 300, 000	36, 630, 000 T	11
Egypt	Tropical (dry)	79, 415, 000	998, 000	299, 400, 000	29, 940, 000 T	13
Iran	Semi-tropical (dry)	74, 826, 000	1, 648, 000	412, 000, 000	41, 200, 000 T	10
Turkey	Semi-Tropical	72, 561, 312	779, 000	194, 750, 000	19, 475, 000 T	16
Congo/ Zaire	Equatorial	67, 827, 000	2, 345, 000	1, 758, 750, 000	175, 875, 000 T	6
Thailand	Tropical	67, 070, 000	513, 000	307, 800, 000	30, 780, 000 T	12

NOTE: Australia has a population of 22, 548, 000 (50^th on the above scale), and has a total land area (in Tropical region, with large desert tracts) of 7, 682, 000 sq km. The volumes of Cellulosic Vegetation Renewable Resources (CVRR) at 1/10^th level would be 1, 920, 500, 000 T. The corresponding Bio-petrochemicals potentials are 192, 050, 000 T. This would put Australia at 6^th Rank, after India (but above Congo). Canada has a total population of 34, 337, 000 (36^th on the above scale) and it has a land area of 9, 970, 000 sq km. It lies in Temperate/ Semi-Torrid region, and has a total Biomass (at 1/10^th level) of 1, 495, 500, 000 T. The corresponding Bio-petrochemicals potentials would be 149, 550, 000 T. This would put Canada above Indonesia.

What are the implications of the results seen in the Table here?

1. On the basis of Renewable Vegetation Resources, Brazil (an equatorial nation) has the largest energy potentials in the world, and Russia (though in the semi-torrid region) is second in view of the largest area covered (over 17 million sq km)

2. Of the twenty nations presented on the basis of largest population, thirteen are Tropical/ Semi-Tropical, and Three are Equatorial (forming eighty percent in these nations tabulated)

3. A presently considered under-developed nation such as Congo/ Zaire has the sixth largest energy potential in the world ahead of all Developed (Western) nations barring the US

4. Bangladesh, an extremely “poor” nation is ahead of all European nations, including Germany, UK and France

5. Ethiopia, which is considered to be disastrously poor and drought prone stands eleventh in the entire world, ahead of all developed European nations

6. The United States is fourth in ranking, followed by India

The question arises: If the above data were to be considered “facts” why is it that no developments are being carried on toward practically implementing those? The answer is complicated on various counts:

1. The entire world is working on the idea that the technologies and developments that catapulted the Western world are the most appropriate for all nations. In the process, we all tend to believe that all tropical nations, which have no resemblance in any aspect of Resources and climatic conditions with respect to the developed Western Temperate zone nations … should also adopt those technologies and methods

2. In spite of all Tropical nations having enough Renewable Resources, the aforementioned “copying” takes each such tropical nation away from following ones own development path, using ones own huge Renewable Resources (RR)

3. A totally unimaginative economics development paradigm is being uniformly followed by all tropical nations … that of wrongly considering that “Export” to the developed Western nations is important for their growth. And almost 100% of those exports are unconnected with their own available local RR. For example, Coffee, Tea, Rubber, Vanilla, Flowers, Sugar … and many more. All these are produced by resorting to intensive (chemicals driven) cultivation, relegating their own natural resources such as Coconuts, Jack Fruits, Local Bananas, Palm varieties, Local vegetables and all other such vegetation systems that grow without any intensive cultivation practices

The following statement of an erstwhile Economist, expressed about Fifty years ago, is a telling remark on these aspects:

“Advanced western technology … is by no means ideally suited to the typical under-developed country … Ideally, the under-developed countries would employ neither the western technology of a century ago (which is defective) nor the most modern western technology (which is adopted to a different economics context), but a THIRD technology which consists of an adaptation of modern methods to the special conditions of the under-developed world … but, such a technology does not exist …” Dr. Richard T. Gill: “ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT – Past and Present” © 1963, Prentice Hall Inc. USA.

It is this THIRD Technology that we at AGRO-BIOGENICS (Clean-Tech) Private Limited (Please see: http://zerowastezerocarbon.wordpress.com/) are aiming to develop and commercialize so that the resultant developments could be spread across the entire Tropical nations, almost all of which are the most under developed nations in the world … Paradoxically, they have the greatest volumes of RR!

CLEAN-TECH DEFINED

We would not be off-track if we state that there is an energy centered “consumption” bias in almost all present day Definitions of the concept of CLEAN-TECH. And there is also a “tilt” in the thinking, based on Temperate Zone experiences alone. Further, not even one of these current definitions seems to strictly consider Clean-Tech in tune with Laws of physical Science … particularly the most important SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS. Without going into the details and explanation of this Scientific law, let us observe that the essence of this Law is that it is impossible for us to “revert back” to an “original state” in space-time-entropy system. For example: people grow old; iron rusts; rocks weather and crumble; water flows from a higher level to a lower level. Not one of these could be expected to work “reverse”. For example, an old man would never “travel” back in time and ultimately enter back into his mother's womb!

In spite of the Thermodynamics truth and the effects of Time-Entropy, we may note that humans could either accelerate or slightly decelerate the inevitable “heat death” of the universe. The last four hundred years, starting from the period of the “Great Voyages” and Explorations (from around 1600 AD), we had seen how every action leads to a cascading environmental and human disasters, apparently accelerating this dreaded end! Today, these are being defined as Carbon Footprint increases in the atmosphere. However, this writer wishes to opine that these have NO MEANING FOR THE NON-TEMPERATE Zone regions … the TROPICS, where the Renewable Resources growth is phenomenal. It is therefore opined that the Tropics, which is constituted by about 160 nations  (with over 4 billion population) and are totally different in every respect from the Temperate zone regions, should follow independent Development paradigm. We shall, thus, define CLEAN-TECH aimed at this new Philosophy.

The concept of CLEAN-TECH may, thus, be defined as:

Technology, Economics, Management and Business that look at the world not as being resource-starved but on the basis of the possibilities of utilizing available Renewable Resources such as Sunlight, Rainwater, Vegetation matter, Animal matter, Wind and Soil. The said utilization would be based on conservation, recycling and a new “Zero-Waste” paradigm

CONCEPTUALIZING CLEAN-TECH

We shall note that the greatest volume of terrestrial resources are the Renewable Resources (RR) in the form of Vegetation/ Plants/ Trees/ Shrubs. Although animal and other “living” organisms may not fall within these vegetation systems, we shall also include those resources within this RR ambit. It is estimated that the rate at which CO2 is “fixed” in plant life is about 45 Kg Cellulose per day, per each individual on earth. This does not include the vegetation matter in the sea/ oceans! Thus, the land based annual vegetation growth on earth could be of the order of 1,000 Billion tons (having average 27% solids; the balance being water) … approximately 150 T per annum per individual on earth (estimated population of 6.6 billion)

The illustration here briefly explains (in a nutshell) the Concept of AGRO-POLYMER INDUSTRY COMPLEX-SUSTAINABILTY ENGINEERED PROJECTS (APIX-SEP). It may be noted that every gram of ALL Available RR would be utilized and Recycled in a Self Regenerative Recycling (SRR) process, resulting in a CLOSED-LOOP ZERO-WASTE ZERO-CARBON BUSINESS-MODEL (ZW-ZC-BM). These resultant integrated and inter-related processes would have the following End products/ Value added productions:

1. Alternate (non-fossil based) Energy

2. Alternate (non-fossil based) Petrochemicals

3. Alternate Renewable Resources based Engineering materials

4. Non-Chemical, Non-Fossil Biofertilizer

5. Biowater

6. Locally driven Processed foods

In the ultimate analyses, we may note that there is the QUADRUPLE IMPACT of TECHNO-SOCIO-COMMERCIAL-ENVIRONMENTAL involvements:

• TECHNICAL: The conversion of RR materials would result in: Energy, Engineered materials, Bio-Petrochemicals, Bio-Fertilizer, Bio-water and Processed Foods

• SOCIAL: These APIX-SEP's would generate enough job-opportunities to local people in villages, reducing the gap between “rich” and “poor”

• BUSINESS: The different Projects would convert available RR into high value businesses, having value additions in the range of 20 to over 100 from the base RR values

• ENVIRONMENTAL: APIX-SEP would mitigate Global Warming and Poverty (GWP), without destroying the environment, through Zero hybridization and total recycling

COMMERCIALIZING CLEAN-TECH

In order that the REAL CLEAN-TECH systems are developed, commercialized and propagated throughout the world, a small group (AGRO-BIOGENICS) have come together, and are planning to set up an APIX_Pilot plant (to begin with in India). The long-term proposition is to set up various APIX Sustainability Engineered projects in almost every one of the 160 Tropical nations. The estimated Worldwide APIX-SEP potentials are of the order of not less than US $4 trillion

The illustration here is the gist of the First APIX_Pilot project

For more info:

Please visit: http://zerowastezerocarbon.wordpress.com/

and http://zerowastezerocarbon.wordpress.com/contact-us/

For immediate contact: hariharan.pv@agro-biogenics.com

According to pick your favorite cleantech and carbon media outlet, California is at war. 

AB 32 is California’s carbon cap and trade law.   The law is most the way ready to implement, with the rulemaking in process now.  It’s aimed squarely at two goals, one, reduce California’s greenhouse gas emissions, and two, since such a reduction is largely symbolic without the rest of the world participating as well (CO2 is the only environmental pollutant that really doesn’t care where in the world it goes in or comes out, so is a truly global pollutant requiring a global response) continue California’s trend of environmental policy leadership, and be the beacon on the hill.

As it currently stands, AB 32 rules (as with most of these things the devil’s in the details, and the 2008 law takes a long time to work out the details) are supposed to be ready to go at the end of this year, and implemented in 2012.

Proposition 23 is an initiative on the ballot designed to indefinitely delay implementation of AB 32.  And for the record, if you don’t click that link at least read the Legislative Analyst’s analysis, I suggest you skip the vote.

The actual impact according to the California voter information guide would be to suspend part of the measures in the Scoping Plan (California’s overall GHG Plan), targeting about half of the emissions in the Scoping Plan:

“Various Climate Change Regulatory Activities Would Be Suspended. This proposition would result in the suspension of a number of measures in the Scoping Plan for which regulations either have been adopted or are proposed for adoption. Specifically, this proposition would likely suspend:

• The proposed cap–and–trade regulation discussed above.
• The “low carbon fuel standard” regulation that requires providers of transportation fuel in California (such as refiners and importers) to change the mix of fuels to lower GHG emissions.
• The proposed ARB regulation that is intended to require privately and publicly owned utilities and others who sell electricity to obtain at least 33 percent of their supply from “renewable” sources, such as solar or wind power, by 2020. (The current requirement that 20 percent of the electricity obtained by privately owned utilities come from renewable sources by 2010 would not be suspended by this proposition.)
• The fee to recover state agency costs of administering AB 32.

Much Regulation in the Scoping Plan Would Likely Continue. Many current activities related to addressing climate change and reducing GHG emissions would probably not be suspended by this proposition. That is because certain Scoping Plan regulations implement laws other than AB 32. The regulations that would likely move forward, for example, include:

• New vehicle emission standards for cars and smaller trucks.
• A program to encourage homeowners to install solar panels on their roofs.
• Land–use policies to promote less reliance on vehicle use.
• Building and appliance energy efficiency requirements.”

Because it is expected to scrap CARB’s proposed expansion of the California RPS to 33% of power from renewable sources up from the current goals of 20% (we’re not there yet), and the removal of the planned Low Carbon Fuel Standard, the entire cleantech sector is up in arms. 

Contrary to popular opinion, a Yes on Prop 23 probably won’t gut the cleantech sector – since cleantech is global and California’s cleantech companies are driven by programs well beyond its borders, since all the major programs Prop 23 affects haven’t actually been enacted yet and several key programs would be untouched (as well that the LCFS probably gets served by things other than cleantech biofuels anyway at least in the first years).  But it would cut into the future growth of renewables in the state a few years down the road, esp wind and large scale solar.

What it would definitely do is kill the nascent push in the US towards real cap and trade just a month ahead of the next round of international climate change negotiations in Cancun.  Quite frankly if California can’t deliver on its own cap and trade law, who else can?

And it would send a signal to the world that California voters are not quite as ready to be the beacon on the hill for environmental issues as they once were.

Will it hurt the economy and kill jobs if we don’t pass it and AB 32 continues?  Unfortunately it depends, with the pain more certain and likely nearer term, and the huge economic benefits more uncertain and likely longer term – though quite substantial in possibilities.  Yes, in the short term and medium term LCFS and 33% RPS and cap and trade will push up power prices and fuel prices in California, hurting consumers, and pushing some production out of the state (if other states and countries don’t continue to match the increased regulation).  That’s why it’s called alternative energy – it’s still more expensive.  But yes, it will probably simultaneously catalyze more venture capital investment (VC services is a big export for us), carbon markets investment (I know about two dozen companies that moved into California specifically because of AB 32 and its first mover advantage in US cap and trade and I helped bring 2 of them in myself), and certainly add some manufacturing and construction jobs in the cleantech sector. 

Net net, higher energy and manufacturing costs in California and an effective renewable and carbon quota mean economic losses in comparative advantage and to consumers in California.  But how much depends on exactly how good a job it does of catalyzing jobs in California for export or replacing business that we currently import to offset that.  And it is very, very hard to underestimate how good California’s environmental leadership has been at catalyzing US and global change.  Meaning the that comparative advantage loss may be short-lived (higher power prices from more low carbon renewables don’t cost California many jobs if its competitors adopt effective carbon prices as well), and if a new export industry and venture capital emerges to be a world leader (which basically pulls dollars from all around the world into Silicon Valley) it means more new California jobs gained than those lost from the comparative advantage shift, then all is good.

Unfortunately, some of that depends on how well CARB actually designs the final rules, and my big fear for California on AB 32 stems from how badly the state screwed up its last major energy deal – power deregulation.  Keep in mind Texas got that one right, and California’s was a fiasco (then as now blamed on the Texans – but I can buy 100% wind power for 11.4 cents a Kwh flat rate in Texas).

So, vote yes, and kill AB 32, and carbon leadership, and ding the rest of the cleantech sector, and you’ll probably never feel the impact in you pocket book (or realize it if you do).  But if you vote yes, you lose all moral right to claim cleantech and environmental leadership for the state.

Or vote no, and keep the state headed in the direction its going – leadership in renewables and carbon, and signal to the world that you care.  More than that, you tell yourself you believe that policy enabled innovation can change your fortune for the better, and outweigh the investment.  That’s technology and venture capital, and that’s what California does best. 

But please, vote for what *you* believe – not because the cleantech sector is screaming that you’re taking away their subsidy or because a couple of independent Texas oil companies are funding the no vote (they are, but to be fair, they provide a lot jobs and taxes to the state, California has not exactly gone out of its way play fair for them in the implementation of AB 32).  And don’t vote one way or the other just because you think it create or kill jobs – because which way the net outcome sways lies on our shoulders, too, from policy makers and CARB staff to the energy industry to the California consumer and business who will pay the final price and reap the final reward either way. 

Neal Dikeman is a founding partner at cleantech merchant bank Jane Capital, has help found or has interests in businesses in carbon (as founding CEO of Carbonflow), solar, superconductors, and green products, and personally stands to lose a lot of money if Proposition 23 passes and AB 32 goes down.

If Jobboards like Monster.com and Careerbuilder.com start Cleantech job channels we know something is going on.
As Greentech is more and more interesting in this financial environment, there will be created more energy jobs and Green Energy jobs within this decade. Obama and Al Gore already pointed out that Climate Change is one of the most critical challenges we face in these days. I just came back from a conference at the UNEP ( United Nations Environment Programme ) Green New Deal they where responsible for the and the paper from March 2009. In this paper they also outlined the job creation opportunities that are possible with eco tourism, construction and energy effiency. I am sure that more and more jobs wil be created oin this sector. Solar, Wind, Water and many other areas. And one is for sure, today´s talent is looking at Clean Tech Career paths.

Dear Fellow cleantech entrepreneur

A&NZSustain is developing the 2010 calendar and is seeking input from speakers, leaders, emergent companies, technologists and developers.

Visit anzsustain.com or email me gareth@anzsustain.com for more information.

Wishing you a prosperous and happy holiday season

Best regards

Gareth