Comments

Thank you for this interview. Not only does the book seem optimistic, but is also seems to get to the truth of environmental motivation, being not only to improve the earth and its inhabitants, but to create viable captial markets. If there is anything off putting about the environmental movement, for lack of a better term, it is the notion that progress is purely environmental and not market driven. Hogwash! No offense with the term here to tree-hugging vegeterian types.

When hugging trees and worshipping Mother Earth is represented in religious terms, when the earth itself is seen as a sort of God or better yet a demigod (half natural and half supernatural, not considering the evolution of things or cause and effect of not greenhouse gases on the environment, but say wind on leaves), there is a strong sense of quackery about the whole matter. Often times organizations, nonprofit and profitable ones alike, seem to be way off in left field, rendering their ultimate purpose of environmental integrity nil to many. But at the base of many too is profit.

Regarding aesthetics and solar paneling, my cool brother, Ellington also know as Duke, has interest in a company that produces a crystal that accomplishes the same thing as does the massive aesthetically-challenged brown solar panels. Not only is the crystal aesthetically more pleasing than the traditional solar panels, it is believed to be more efficient. They claim that their product is “the simplest, smallest, and most effective method, using fiber optics to bring light indoors.” As Duke is a financial guy, I can only imagine that there must be something to the capital structure of such a venture that is appealing, while good work is being accomplished. This sounds pretty cool to me. Not being particularly well versed in these matters, there must be many other such inventions.

There are other parts of the interview that got me to thinking…namely one of my small companies that focuses on urban redevelopment (testing where the steel or auto industry once was, not to mention air pollution, is alarming), each material having its own energy equation, the supremacy of human energy (yes! I said supremacy), prizes getting the juice of entrepreneurs going, the role of government to start the pistol to begin the race by setting up a cap and trade system, and many others. I will read the book and recommend it to Duke. I’m sure a flurry of thoughts, the kind that produce actions, will emerge.

Thanks, Erik for your reflection on the Pan Mass Challenge. The image was nice.

Posted by Judith Ellis at April 11, 2008 1:19 PM

Nikola Tesla, born in Croatia 1856, inventor of 20th century and constructor og Niagara Falls, had one project in 1901 called World wireless in Long Island, New York. He was stopped at that time.
http://www.pbs.org/tesla/

Orgon energy discovered by Wilhelm Reich, coleague of Sigmund Freud, inventor of ''Cloudbusters'', died in american prison. He also discovered free energy for humanity but was murdered.

Soon, this civilisation will be mature enough to have free energy. Very soon.

Pyramids are energetic facility and can be used for all planet. There is a key how to exploit them. This knowledge was burried with last dynasty of pharaoh's before Moses.

Posted by Ina Matijevic at April 12, 2008 5:53 AM

Hi Ina...I don't know about the truth of the conspiracies you evoke (are conspiracies and truth diametrically opposed?), but I am getting an increasing idea that you greatly value all things free. Whether this is reality in your part of the world or will become more prevalent in mine (which I sincerely doubt), there will always be central control by someone or something in value (capital or human.) History proves this.

Since the beginning of time, before the pharaohs and Moses, history seems to reflect trade systems which position people in places of power, even bartering. Energy is no different. The key seems to be to have a cap and trade system so described in the interview initiated by governments worldwide that would be good for all. Now, here’s a good role for government.

The cap and trade system described seems like a worthy global system. It has the great potential of both saving the planet (as so propagated by environmental enthusiasts) and maintaining a solid capital system in which entrepreneurs can succeed. I so appreciate the clarity and knowledge given in this interview. Did I say thank you?

Posted by Judith Ellis at April 12, 2008 9:37 AM

And Ina...I appreciate the spirit of your message that "civilization will be mature enough to have free energy. Very soon." It is your hope and unity that draws.

Posted by Judith Ellis at April 12, 2008 9:46 AM

Judith,

Yes, it seems like SF theory to have free energy.
But for Indigo and Crystal children it is only reality. They have come to this world to bring Golden Age.

Money is pure energy and is currently diverted in different flow. In fifth dimension, things are completly different and there is no history that will help humans evolve up. Only heart can help.

And Mr. Krupp said the same thing but differently:'' Actually, I think it will be human energy. When we unleash this incredible amount of resourcefulness, talent, and genius, it's going to prove that the same profit motive that got us into this fix can get us out of it.''

I work on one project based on my dream that will help in exploitation of gheotermal energy Kutnjak-Lunjkovec and will bring hundreds of jobs in this part of Croatia. My whole being is immersed in this.

Posted by Ina Matijevic at April 12, 2008 12:00 PM

Free health care for every person and free energy is a perfect playground.
This is a template.

Posted by Ina Matijevic at April 12, 2008 12:11 PM

Flow on, Ina, in any dimension of choice. Not being a physicist, I would imagine that anything on a subatomic level is energy and in this regard money is such. But money, to my knowledge, has no value save the value humans give it. Neither does it have consciousness; this is also to my knowledge.

Human energy, in the form of genuis and talent, embodied in mass, can indeed get us out of the fix so described. It is we ourselves who have gotten us in this fix and it is we ourselves who will get us out of it. There remains the matter of how. Fred Krupp makes a very compelling argument.

Human energy, in bodidly mass, with consciousness guided by wisdom, passion, understanding, and compassion can indeed accomplish much. Best with your efforts in Croatia.

Posted by Judith Ellis at April 12, 2008 12:48 PM

Judith, I have one free thing for You, and all stuff of Tom Peters company and all members of this blog.

Have a beautiful day!!!

http://www.icq.com/greetings/cards/129/

Posted by Ina Matijevic at April 12, 2008 1:14 PM

Thanks, Ina. Too cute! Ditto.

Posted by Judith Ellis at April 12, 2008 3:30 PM

The extraterrestrial who shares my blog enjoyed the Krupp book immensely; noting that several of the programs it describes (especially the carbon-cap-and-trade initiative) would be compatible with our ideas in Managing Global Survival, a book we just co-authored.

Posted by Don Lebell at April 13, 2008 3:46 PM

Nice interview. A cogent summary of the problem and a thoughtful, if controversial, solution.

Posted by John O'Leary at April 13, 2008 8:26 PM

Yeah, well, probably you should all read this before you get too "cool friendy" about Mr. Krupp's cap & trade ideas:

http://cafehayek.typepad.com/hayek/2008/04/green-is-as-gre.html

Posted by Skeptic at April 14, 2008 6:43 AM

Thank you, Skeptic. Good thread there.

Posted by Judith Ellis at April 14, 2008 7:18 AM

Skeptic...you have peaked my skepticism. All the letters are from energy company lobbying firms...hmmm

I personally don't get too excited about the economics. Sometimes we have to invest in the future rather than just profiting from the present. I am not sure that caring about the earth and our children fits into any profit based energy policy.

Posted by Mike Neiss at April 14, 2008 11:19 AM

Amen, Mike, on investing in "the future rather than just profiting from the present." But if both can be done, I'd be down with that.

Posted by Judith Ellis at April 14, 2008 11:37 AM

One aspect of global warming that's often overlooked is our diet's contribution to the earth's health.

"The Food and Agriculture Organisation calculates that animal keeping is responsible for 18% of greenhouse gas emissions." - from an article in the Guardian, titled "Credit crunch? The real crisis is global hunger. And if you care, eat less meat"

Link - http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/apr/15/food.biofuels

Posted by Chetan Dhruve at April 15, 2008 2:09 AM

Mike N., others: I am frankly offended by your attitudes. I do not believe climate change is a problem, nor do I believe the science proves it. So, therefore, by your words I do not care about the planet or your children? Or, I am not investing in the future, just profiting from the present? Mike, I used to respect you, but your tone and words suggest you are incapable of understanding that just because someone does not believe oil is bad or cows are bad, but believes ethanol should not be subsidized, and carbon cap & trade schemes are wrong they somehow are against the environment or the future.

Posted by Skeptic at April 15, 2008 8:31 AM

Skeptic…since you are one who wishes to remain ball-less-ly anonymous, I'm unsure if anyone here or anywhere would value your open rebuke. And believe me, I am one who values open rebuke over secret love.

I do, however, appreciate your opinion that oil or cows are not bad (not much inherently is), but neither are means at looking at various ways of existing, various ways of exploring innovation.

Posted by Judith Ellis at April 15, 2008 9:33 AM

Chetan Dhruve,

I agree with You. Here is a pdf file of FAO document on environmental issues and options on livestock and climate changes.
http://www.virtualcentre.org/en/library/key_pub/longshad/A0701E00.pdf

I do not eat that which has eyes, mother, father and family.

As Einstein said: ''Vegetarian food leaves a deep impression on our nature. If the whole world adopts vegetarianism, it can change the destiny of humankind.''

Posted by Ina Matijevic at April 15, 2008 12:58 PM

There is an inescapable mandate to convert to less economically suicidal energy distribution models than the carbon-based status-quo. Note, Sir skeptic, I said economically suicidal, not environmentally, though the status quo is certainly destructive enough of that, global climate change (of course it's happening, of course, our current use patterns don't do anything to ease it), aside.

Back when I was a volunteer fire dept guy, I can remember running into the burning house of a drunk guy who tried to stop us at the door because he needed us to know, "I didn't fall asleep smoking," more than he wanted us to stop the fire before it became serious. Those naifs who still want to debate whether global climate shifts are human-induced, human-accelerated or are occurring independent of human activities are merely philosophers wasting oxygen and time and ink.

And I have my problems with cap and trade, as well, and in expecting markets to solve all problems.

People seem to forget that just because markets are the best general solution, they must always be "the best" solution, or, in some cultists' minds, "the only solution" (I've met people who believe that any problem that can't be solved by a market either isn't a real problem or isn't solvable -- I think we have a few of those Cult of Free Markets members here at TP, actually).

Market incentives haven't cracked the intractable capital punishment the petroleum/carbon complex guarantees to execute upon free enterprise. They can twiddle with some of the marginal value issues, but in the end, who wins and who loses won't be apparent on any financial balance sheet. The externalities (the dirty little secret of Econ -- whatever you can't measure slips out of the equation, rolls under the table to be ignored if at all possible) just overwhelm the ability of bookkeepers to rationalize. And unless we get a grip on this vast transfer of investment capital (and, oh yeah, wealth, too) from somewhat democratic, somewhat-free enterprise societies to not-even-remotely democratic and sometimes downright Stalinist societies (ruled, in many cases by inherited royalty and wealth -- the death of free enterprise and meritocracy), entrepreurialism is a dead duck.

Markets alone won't solve it. Alternatives, including governmental interventions, required.

Unless, of course, you're content barbequeing yourself (crackle, crackle) while arguing skillfully (crackle, crackle) it's not really your fault the fire is crackling.

http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/pcook62/index_files/page0005.htm

or, more entertainingly, the Classics Comic book version:
http://www.garretthardinsociety.org/info/cartoon_commons1.html

Posted by jeff angus at April 15, 2008 1:22 PM

Skeptic...certainly did not mean to offend. We just disagree. I believe science has made a clear case for climate change, and you don't. I believe that profiteering and greed are powerful forces in the US economy, and don't think execs who try to maximize short term profits care about future generations..you don't agree. I can live with that disagreement, hope you can.

Posted by Mike Neiss at April 16, 2008 5:48 AM

Jeff Angus..beautiful! Thank you. I loved your "whatever you can't measure slips out of the equation" This slipage is also true of other such intangible immeasurables such as human relations to solve problems from work related matters to global ones.

For me, it is not a matter of the market solving all things. It is a matter of setting up a system of business that steems from natural order (trade, community, competition) that would need constant improvement for there to be free trade that is equitable for all.

Regarding other systems, it would be foolish not to consider the value and pitfalls of all systems and work to better improve our system. Some have said that the jury is still out on captailism.

The jury undoubtedly remains out on any system that will not re-invent itself. We see this re-invention of the capitalist system in many parts of the world. It has also been said that the jury is out on the self-destruction of mankind without the re-invention of policy and practices worldwide.

In the above case, who would be around to tell the story? This is the importance of those intangibles and immeasurables.

Posted by Judith Ellis at April 16, 2008 8:59 AM

Ina, thanks for the link. I've been vegetarian since birth, a result of being born in a vegetarian Hindu family.

I have also realised that being vegetarian isn't enough, and hence I am now an aspiring vegan. I'm trying to adopt an animal-product free lifestyle - excluding dairy products, leather, silk, wool and so on. It is not easy, I have to admit!

Posted by Chetan Dhruve at April 16, 2008 9:12 AM

Folks - This is great discussion because it presents many and varied views on the question of "how can we best reduce our collective carbon footprints on this planet?"

Fred Krupp makes sense when he points to alternate energy sources. Wind and sun are key elements in moving away from our dependence on carbon. He makes the valid point that limits or a cap has to be set as a constraint on greenhouse gas emissions - only governments can do that part of the job.

But I have come to the conclusion that the only sustainable way to reduce our carbon dependence is to change the way we produce, distribute, and consume goods and services. This means the ball is with business not government - governments can set the parameters for change but big and small business has deliver an executable low carbon model.

Many big businesses are reforming their carbon habits - we see that Wal-Mart, Tesco, News Corp, etc are all serious about reducing the carbon footprint of their business operations. News Corp is using carbon trading and carbon offset schemes for the significant carbon footprint of its employees who chalk up many miles/kilometers in planes. Sir Richard Branson too is concerned about Virgin Airlines carbon footprint and he also uses offsets - he has recently proved that a bio-fuel could be used in his aircraft. Problem was the harvesting of this fuel impacted adversely on food crops - and so it goes.... But business is trying to comply with politicians ambitious targets so there is movement in this realm.

My strategy for you if you are trying to reduce the carbon footprint of your business is simple. Yeah Trevor, wherever you are, I too sometimes come up with Simplicity in the face of complexity , ambiguity, and uncertainty. Clear, hold, and build. Yeah it is the strategy that is behind the surge in Iraq - it is the only strategy that has really worked in Iraq since the invasion.

Clear out the old carbon dependent ideologies. Replace them with new models including carbon offsets if needs be - but mainly create new revenue models that are not dependent on carbon cycles. Hold these ideas in prototypes and test them and then test them again and again until you refine them. As you refine them build in carbon sensitive feedback loops. Build a low carbon business culture (ie the way we do things around here is with a low carbon footprint)....

Richard.

Posted by Richard Lipscombe at April 16, 2008 5:24 PM viagra 100 mg prices

Hi Richard – I’m still around my friend. Just watching from the sidelines at present. As Don Henley’s Eagles lyrics say … ‘I’ve been waiting in the weeds …waiting for my time to come around again’ ’

What you say certainly makes sense to me. By the way I love your ‘Richard Lipscombe’ model CHB (Clear Hold and Build) as much as I love Walter Shewhart’s PDSA (Plan Do Study Act) of the 1930’s - both are underpinned by simplicity.

I’m not aware of all the arguments around global warming – that stuff is way too academic and deep for me, a mere farmer’s boy from li’l’ ol’ England.

I do know from reading ‘Screw It Let’s Do It’ that Sir Richard changed his mind overnight after meeting Al Gore and watching ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ with Mr Gore. After that meeting, reducing Virgin Airlines and Virgin Trains carbon footprint became Sir Richard’s new big goal. Good on him I say. I am of the school that says we are loaned this planet temporarily for safe keeping for our children and grandchildren.

I also - more strongly - believe God has an expectation on us to protect His planet.

So my team on this is God, Richard Branson, Walter Shewhart and Richard Lipscombe - not a bad line up aye? :-)

Best wishes to all at TP and all commenters on a wonderful Spring day here in Shakespeare’s County, Warwickshire, England – my little corner of Heaven here on Earth. In our wonderful tiny village there are as many horses on our roads as cars and the ‘prints’ left on our village roads are from the horses more than the cars if you get my drift. The sun is shining and life is great.

Posted by Trevor Gay at April 17, 2008 9:36 AM

Trevor

Thanks for that rap, you are such a generous and kind hearted person - naturally the money I promised you to say all that is 'in the mail'.

I love the team you have assemble (I just lost all sense and pretense of humility didn't I?)... I know the other Richard of whom you speak - but the other two are not familiar to me.....

In the best traditions of Tom Peters - I can proudly report that I stole the 'Clear, Hold, and Build' strategy (at least the underlying ideas) from the US military. They used it in Vietnam and now again in Iraq with great success... Trust they will not sue me because I now use Clear, Hold, and Build as the core of my business change model simply because it works.

If and when you want to bring effective change to a regime, Nation-State, corporation, global network, local community, or workplace I recommend Clear, Hold, and Build...

Richard.

Posted by Richard Lipscombe at April 17, 2008 4:30 PM