150 years from now my grandkids' kids - who we are all workin' for, by the way, will study our time. What will they say? And how will they say it? I hope the lesson is brought by a well paid teacher supported by the appropriate amount of technology. It will likely be easy to display the economic history of "modern" times on some plasma HD touch sensitive carbon - free, RF neutral screen. But what will it say about us? What will our time be called? They will read about the Great Depression and several successive recessions. They'll read about pyramid schemes debilitating the world economy. The "war on terror" and the great election of 2008. But what will be on the other side of all that? Will it be the crisis that spawned an economic revolution? Will it be that we tried but not enough?Will it be that the world they enjoy owes a debt of gratitude to this time....the time of the Great Transition? The time that led to respect for culture, for global economic systems that made for the most possible enjoyment for the most possible people? Will unicorns run free?
I dunno, there are so many ways to say it..."in crisis there is opportunity" ; "when life hands you lemons...." But really, as we look around, read about the world and learn daily about another economic collapse and another social tragedy, do we have a choice? Because the choice is, really, change or die. Because either the planet or the people will revolt. The question is which will take longer to heat up? The polar ice caps, the dessicated brush or the dispossessed peoples?
At the risk of saying "this is our time" and sounding like a cheese-ball half-time pep talk...this is our time...'cause there might not be a second half. So tell everyone you know to change. Change every single thing you can about your life that makes less waste, that helps other people gain equity, that proves that people and business can be engines for change. Because I want our time to be The Great Transition, not the Second Great Depression. Or the Even Greater Depression. Or The Great Decline.
How can I, you, we start thinking about this, visualizing it and making changes? Look ahead. Look at the world you want and then look back to today.
This is a process called "backcasting" used in the Sustainability framework called "The Natural Step". http://www.naturalstep.org/
Look at the results you want, the outcome you want...the outcome we need and then make decisions based on getting there. Input all the places and decisions you make in your everyday life into this equation. In The Natural Step it is called "the funnel". It refers to the declining natural resources and the expanding demand. The declining resources is a downward curve, the expanding demand is an upward curve. They meet at a vortex....hence the funnel... on the other side of the funnel is the desired outcome.
I am oversimplifying the process...you can read all you want at the link I provided above. In my simplistic way...put all your opportunities for change into the big side of the funnel...and one by one, make the changes you can and encourage others to do the same. Start with some easy things...buy fair trade organic coffee or tea. Stop using corn sysrup. Buy paper products made from 100% post consumer waste. Compost your food waste. Recycle. Re-Use grocery bags. There are some many little things...and big ones like house and car, commute and investments.
What am I doing? You may have asked by now. I have had my successes and failures but the net as of today is that we've been able to do some good things. We went from two cars down to one. That one runs on biodiesel. (insert complaint about biodiesel here....)
We get our veggies from a local CSA Farm - Community Supported Agriculture. We bought part of a cow from our neighbors who raise cattle in the region in a sustainable manner. We buy our lamb from a local farm. It is hormone free, organic, natural, etc.
We eat organic foods and we don't eat much processed food at all. We've done some remodeling of our craftsman home with some sustainable building products like Richlite and Marmoleum. We used low/no VOC paints. We have some radiant heat flooring and a tankless water heater. We've installed some efficient windows and some insulation but still have a ways to go on that score.
We haven't been successful composting. We did it for a while but there are some difficulties with it that we are overcoming with a new system. We want to move our investments into socially and environmentally responsible funds and haven't done that yet. It should happen this year.
The things we have done we've done over time from our first remodel in 2001 until today. So that's eight years!
And if you are in business then you can have a great force multiplier, exponential impact. Make changes in your work place. If you are the boss or can influence the boss...make changes that have a positive ripple affect through your company, your customers, your vendors, your supply chain.
I feel like I want to write more about this concept of The Great Transition. I am hopeful about it. I think our government is fostering hope now and I know that business can be the engine for this Great Transition just on good old fashioned financial common sense. And it can be now.
On that note...I will write more tomorrow about attending a talk by Amory Lovins earlier this evening. His thought leadership is a powerful spark in The Great Transition.
thanks
Friday, February 20, 2009
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Saw Paul Krugman last night and I wonder if there is enough money in the world to bail us out
Sobering. And needed. I did learn a few things last night that I want to pass along. One is this...if you can't pay $50 for a lecture....see if the person will be interviewed on your local npr or community station. If they have a book to promote then their spiel will be virtually the same for free over the airwaves. But, you might get some additional remarks "live"...and then there's the social aspect of congregation but I digress....
Mr. Krugman is very connected to Mr. Bernanke as they served at Princeton together. Mr. Krugman said that Mr. Bernanke had been, "...demoted to run the world..." That got some laughs.
But that connection, I hope, has deeper roots. Mr. Krugman can probably affect more change from his position as a Nobel Laureate, Economic Genius and pundit than he could if he were at Treasury. Here are some things he noted that I would guess are being heeded by his former boss:
Temporary nationalization of the Financial sector is probably needed.
We have an "ugly several years..." ahead of us.
We will likely get to "at least 9% unemployment"
If we do not stimulate enough we will have a depression.
and, Only in America...will we see millions more lose health insurance and fall into deep poverty because of the insufficiency of our social safety net.
and on the question of where stimulus money will go...
he said that he thought money would go to municipalities and suggested that maybe investing in Muni's might be a thing to do.
On localized economies he was not as enthusiastice as I would have predicted. He said that on a small scale, and he mentioned "produce" (as in farms), that local revitalization would have some benefits...but that the utter scale of what needs to be done forces global action and that we , "cannot turn back the clock on globalization."
He went further to say that, "a total local economy is not fair to the developing world". He talked about how the developing nations needed global markets to improve.
He also alluded to the lack of manufacturing and product creation in our own society by saying that, "Eventually we need to sell things to China." And he means things other than IOU's. That got a laugh but it probably shouldn't have.
Afterwards I asked Mr. Krugman if he would write about Steady State Economics on his blog. He said he'd try. He seemed pretty darn tired and I guess a book tour will do that to a person.
I was very inspired by the two World Affairs Council awards that were given out to a teacher, Bob Mazelow, and school administrator, Karen Kodama. Their stories about how they bring the world into their classrooms and their students out to the world were quite inspiring.
Mr. Krugman is very connected to Mr. Bernanke as they served at Princeton together. Mr. Krugman said that Mr. Bernanke had been, "...demoted to run the world..." That got some laughs.
But that connection, I hope, has deeper roots. Mr. Krugman can probably affect more change from his position as a Nobel Laureate, Economic Genius and pundit than he could if he were at Treasury. Here are some things he noted that I would guess are being heeded by his former boss:
Temporary nationalization of the Financial sector is probably needed.
We have an "ugly several years..." ahead of us.
We will likely get to "at least 9% unemployment"
If we do not stimulate enough we will have a depression.
and, Only in America...will we see millions more lose health insurance and fall into deep poverty because of the insufficiency of our social safety net.
and on the question of where stimulus money will go...
he said that he thought money would go to municipalities and suggested that maybe investing in Muni's might be a thing to do.
On localized economies he was not as enthusiastice as I would have predicted. He said that on a small scale, and he mentioned "produce" (as in farms), that local revitalization would have some benefits...but that the utter scale of what needs to be done forces global action and that we , "cannot turn back the clock on globalization."
He went further to say that, "a total local economy is not fair to the developing world". He talked about how the developing nations needed global markets to improve.
He also alluded to the lack of manufacturing and product creation in our own society by saying that, "Eventually we need to sell things to China." And he means things other than IOU's. That got a laugh but it probably shouldn't have.
Afterwards I asked Mr. Krugman if he would write about Steady State Economics on his blog. He said he'd try. He seemed pretty darn tired and I guess a book tour will do that to a person.
I was very inspired by the two World Affairs Council awards that were given out to a teacher, Bob Mazelow, and school administrator, Karen Kodama. Their stories about how they bring the world into their classrooms and their students out to the world were quite inspiring.
Saturday, January 3, 2009
A Worse Hell
$700 Billion is a lot. I cannot conceive of it. It is like thinking about how long ago the dinosaurs roamed the earth. Let's not become extinct because of bad decisions.
If this bailout money follows the money that got us into this mess then hell will be revisited upon our children's children. It is how the money is used now to CHANGE the world, especially the world of business, that will yield a better, cleaner, more vibrant and sustainable world.
Here is what I mean: The auto companies must make much more fuel efficient vehicles, plug-in electric vehicles, CNG vehicles and the like. They must adopt "lightweighting" carbon fiber construction like the next generation of jets. (there is a reason Mr. Mulally went from Boeing to Ford, isnt there?)
See this link for an interview with Amory Lovins about what the car companies need to do.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-10112893-54.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20
In general, the bailout money for ALL industries must go, in some large part, to fix the dirty industrial cycle that has polluted our world and further segmented our society. It is the R&D into sustainable business and the kinds of goods that get made and purchased that will ensure we do not repeat the dirty industrial cycle. This money cannot revive the same fiscal, environmental and socially unaccountable enterprise that created the problem.
There was an opinion piece in the NY Times Sunday December 28th by Bob Linglis and Arthur B Laffer (Laffer Curve, Supply-Side economist) called "An Emissions Plan Conservatives Could Warm To". I was astonished to read that they support moving gas and oil subsidies into "greener" pastures. They support a tax policy that drives behaviors we want (using less carbon dioxide) and keeps more of what people need (money!). This is strong sustainable thinking. Essentially they agree with Amory Lovins, Al Gore, and others, to say that they, and Conservatives, could support, "a carbon tax offset by a payroll or income tax cut."
I am truly excited about the increasing commentary from Conservatives about agreement on the concepts of sustainability in policy and business. I have not listened to what the likes of Rush Limbaugh are saying on this topic. If Rush is truly a conservative and not a populist wind-bag, then I would expect he would encourage bi-partisan efforts to pass legislation on these ideas and to not identify them as "left" or "radical" etc. But then...how would he get ratings? I do not have faith in him or the radio industry on that topic. But I hope.
The only troubling item stuck in the piece was the support of nuclear power. This is a "sustainability non-starter" Seeing as we are worried about "waste" in the form of CO2 today...why would we not be worried about the grand-daddy of all wastes...the nuclear variety? Makes no sense. Should not be on the table.
So how can we avoid a worse hell for our kids and their kids? Vote with your dollar (you probably already voted with your....vote) and read up on some of these topics. Search for Rocky Mountain Institute on the web, Buy a used copy of Natural Capitalism or Cradle to Cradle or go to http://www.biomimicry.net/ to learn about the concept of biomimmicry.
If you are a business person then please use your knowledge and experience to change just one aspect of your business to be sustainable. Start with energy efficiency. You'll begin to save some money. Put that money to good use elsewhere in your business. Make your impact locally and endeavor to pass along your stories so others can carry on.
If this bailout money follows the money that got us into this mess then hell will be revisited upon our children's children. It is how the money is used now to CHANGE the world, especially the world of business, that will yield a better, cleaner, more vibrant and sustainable world.
Here is what I mean: The auto companies must make much more fuel efficient vehicles, plug-in electric vehicles, CNG vehicles and the like. They must adopt "lightweighting" carbon fiber construction like the next generation of jets. (there is a reason Mr. Mulally went from Boeing to Ford, isnt there?)
See this link for an interview with Amory Lovins about what the car companies need to do.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-10112893-54.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20
In general, the bailout money for ALL industries must go, in some large part, to fix the dirty industrial cycle that has polluted our world and further segmented our society. It is the R&D into sustainable business and the kinds of goods that get made and purchased that will ensure we do not repeat the dirty industrial cycle. This money cannot revive the same fiscal, environmental and socially unaccountable enterprise that created the problem.
There was an opinion piece in the NY Times Sunday December 28th by Bob Linglis and Arthur B Laffer (Laffer Curve, Supply-Side economist) called "An Emissions Plan Conservatives Could Warm To". I was astonished to read that they support moving gas and oil subsidies into "greener" pastures. They support a tax policy that drives behaviors we want (using less carbon dioxide) and keeps more of what people need (money!). This is strong sustainable thinking. Essentially they agree with Amory Lovins, Al Gore, and others, to say that they, and Conservatives, could support, "a carbon tax offset by a payroll or income tax cut."
I am truly excited about the increasing commentary from Conservatives about agreement on the concepts of sustainability in policy and business. I have not listened to what the likes of Rush Limbaugh are saying on this topic. If Rush is truly a conservative and not a populist wind-bag, then I would expect he would encourage bi-partisan efforts to pass legislation on these ideas and to not identify them as "left" or "radical" etc. But then...how would he get ratings? I do not have faith in him or the radio industry on that topic. But I hope.
The only troubling item stuck in the piece was the support of nuclear power. This is a "sustainability non-starter" Seeing as we are worried about "waste" in the form of CO2 today...why would we not be worried about the grand-daddy of all wastes...the nuclear variety? Makes no sense. Should not be on the table.
So how can we avoid a worse hell for our kids and their kids? Vote with your dollar (you probably already voted with your....vote) and read up on some of these topics. Search for Rocky Mountain Institute on the web, Buy a used copy of Natural Capitalism or Cradle to Cradle or go to http://www.biomimicry.net/ to learn about the concept of biomimmicry.
If you are a business person then please use your knowledge and experience to change just one aspect of your business to be sustainable. Start with energy efficiency. You'll begin to save some money. Put that money to good use elsewhere in your business. Make your impact locally and endeavor to pass along your stories so others can carry on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)