Growth v. Development

Finally, more about the evolution/revolution that is that thing called "sustainability".


What is it? Well, at this point in my progression I have boiled it down in my mind to this: Growth v. Development. Mind you, this is not a new idea. Search the interwebs, you'll find oodles of info about it. But the idea is certainly not a part of the daily discussion about our economic situation. And I believe it has to be. 


Grow - the 1st definition that appears in Websters online is: to spring up and develop to maturity. 


OK, that sounds harmless enough. 


Development, from the same source uses the word grow in it and there are a lot of nuanced definitions. One says: "...to work out the possibilities" and another, "...to cause to unfold gradually" and only one of the deeper definitions used the word "expand" which implies  "bigger". 


The problem is that when the talk turns to Economic Growth there seems to be no maturity point or discussion of natural cycles...and so the growth is then (and this is what we THINK we want in order to get rich) unfettered growth...without a natural cycle and this is the goal of investors and businesses.


I have some experience with this. As a sales manager there was no room for discussions of natural business cycles and time after time I saw business owners and other managers talking about growth only as more and more and not smarter and smarter. Sure, lip service was paid to being smart about it. But the "it" was always more and more. The only time there was action regarding smart development (and it was not called that) was after 2008. And what ended up happening was relentless layoffs and lowered standards. 


So - here's what I think. EVERYONE has to start substituting the word DEVELOPMENT for the word GROWTH. We do not need unfettered GROWTH to save our economy. We need SMART DEVELOPMENT. We do  not need MORE AND MORE STUFF...because that is the result of unfettered economic growth. We need SMARTER STUFF. We need SMALLER STUFF. And there has to be LESS STUFF. If you haven't seen The Story of Stuff take some time to do it.


Growth, Growth, Growth...that's is the mantra of people when they are talking about "fixing" the economy. Here's another way to put it: "...progressive and uncontrolled growth..." but wait, this is in the definition of cancerous growth. Hmmmmmm...


Our Government needs to make this change. The President, Congress, Treasury, everyone. Growth is the buzzword that Democrats will use to try and get the attention of moderate Republicans, business people, etc, that think that Democrats want to take their money and give it to poor people. Republicans use it as a mantra...all business people do. It is ingrained in us to grow. And what we really ought to be doing is "to develop" the economy. I believe if it is viewed through the lens of triple bottom line economics - People, Planet, Profits, then that growth, that development will be slower, more sustained, multi-dimensional, more inclusive and, well, better. 

Realistic Advice and One INSANE Idea

I can't help writing about the Gulf as I think it is the turning point in our energy future...and in governance too, for that matter.
This article, with quotes from a Transocean attorney and industry veteran, I found compelling EXCEPT for the suggestion that we use a s small nuclear device to plug the hole. OK, so he inhaled a little too many fumes along the way....
But he alludes to the fact that Russia actually DID such a thing years ago! Hello? Not that I follow all the nuclear explosions on the planet very closely...but I thought that would have made some news.

Quote:


The very depth of the well is one reason this spill has been so bad—5,000 feet under water and another 18,000 feet in the Earth to tap into oil. The deeper you go, the more pressure there is, and it’s that pressure that blew through protective measures that proved too flimsy, destroying a vessel twice the size of an aircraft carrier in a plume of black smoke and flame. On Wednesday, the latest attempt froze as a saw blade being used to cut through a pipe to allow for a new containment dome got stuck.

Simmons said the BP Deepwater Horizon spill may just be the event that spurs a reaction that shortens the time horizon for the switch from oil. His favored approach is the development of offshore wind turbines, but other ideas include the use of algae as a substitute for oil.

“I think it could happen within five years if we tackle this with the intensity that we reacted after Pearl Harbor,” he said. “We have to use that intensity now, and that’s the only good thing about the tragedy—it’s going to focus people on the problem.”

http://www.portfolio.com/industry-news/energy/2010/06/03/matthew-simmons-reflects-on-deepwater-horizon-disaster?ana=e_pft

End quote

The fact that the pressure is coming from 18,000 feet below the bottom of the ocean floor...that is of volcanic proportions! And it virtually vaporized something twice the size of an aircraft carrier? This, for me, gives some perspective to the problem.

Any elected official, lobbyist, activist, voter who does NOT see this as the bellweather event for the change to a clean, safe, secure energy economy has got other priorities such as self preservation through financial donations, denial, disregard for the future of our planet and their progeny upon it, political motivations...and I am sure there are more.

I have said it before...and again...there are thousands upon thousands of good hardworking, well - meaning people working for the likes of BP. They all just need to understand that they must be a part of the change that is happening. They don't need to lose their jobs or get relocated. They just need to know that what they do everyday isn't going to be supporting the ever riskier search for and extraction of oil.

More BP...Takeover Target???

I recently wrote about how BP needs to change into a beneficial corporation. It was a quick post...and of course I forgot to mention the wonderful people at B Corp

http://www.bcorporation.net/

who are already doing this kind of work. Are they talking to BP? I hope so...but really...nobody at BP has the time at this point...but that isn't stopping me from saying what ought to be done.



I also said that BP should Belong to the People. But really, shouldn't it Belong to the Planet?

There was an article in the Guardian

http://m.guardian.co.uk/?id=102202&story=http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/jun/02/speculation-over-bp-future

about BP being a possible takeover target. And I wrote to them...takeover by whom? By the people and Natural Capital they have destroyed? How could we stand by and allow Shell or some private equity firm buy BP at cents on the dollar only to cut costs, adopt "synergies" and then spin it? Nothing would change.

There are some similarities with the Bhopal disaster perpetrated upon the people and the planet by Union Carbide. There was a criminal probe. The CEO was actually arrested...then released but then brought up late on manslaughter charges. Will this happen here?

Union Carbide stock took a big plunge. I remember as I almost bought some, knowing it would go up again because they were one of the top 20 biggest companies in the world...but I could not bring myself to do it.

So why shouldn't we allow a trust for the people and the planet of some sort to aquire BP for cents on the dollar and turn it into a restorative business operation?

The new BP

Belonging to the People...that's what BP should stand for. They need to have what Ray Anderson famously has written about - a "mid - course correction". From now on all their after tax profits should go to R&D into clean energy, conservation, and most importantly for now, stopping the disaster and cleaning it up.

I actually don't think it is possible to clean this mess up.

This is our 7th Generation disaster - the one that wakes us up to realize that what we have just perpetrated upon the world will be with the world for AT LEAST 7 generations. With increasing life expectancies that is about 665 years...and I think we're talking about thousands of years.

But back to BP. They should be Beyond Petrified.

BP needs to transform their organization into one that from this day forward does good for humankind. It should be an organization that now takes its' upstream and downstream effects into its accounting. It should recreate balance sheets reflecting the debits of plundered natural capital. And, when done, the company will immediately be worthless in any current corporate sense of the word. And so it needs to transform.

I think it should take this transformation on itself because I am hoping that the people and the people's courts and the people's elected officials will do it...slowly and painfully...but they'll do it.

And BP has the opportunity that is so common amongst celebrities and reality show drop-outs: go to rehab, apologize and turn over a new leaf...but REALLY do it.

Change the articles of incorporation. BP should exist solely for the betterment of the planet. It can lead in the creation of a new kind of organization - the neo - corporation. There shouldn't be one cent of corporate profit that goes back to that company.

I do not mean to say that the good people of BP and their families should suffer. They should just all relaize that they need to be working for a different kind of organization. And I am not saying it should be without profit. It's just that the profit should go to those they have harmed, to do whatever can be done to mend the corner of the earth they have destroyed. Why can't they have a bonus structure related to "good works"...to "clean, green tech" and to divisions that do good and do well.

Business people love ratios and metrics. And there can be new ones created that reflect the good a company does relative to its' revenue, its intensity of production, per employee, etc, etc. BP should change all these to reflect the new kind of organization I have described.

The employees and contractors found to have avoided safety regs, greenlighted unsafe projects and lied about it should pay and go to jail. That's justice. And the next generation of justice will be for the company to transform into this neo corporate entity infused with sustainability.

The Great Transition

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

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.

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.