Updated: 9/11/06; 7:28:05 AM.
Sustainability
        

Thursday, December 19, 2002

Do the math: NOT the path to energy independence.

US Fish and Wildlife Service:  How much oil in the arctic national wildlife refuge (ANWR)?  To sum up:  there is a 50% chance of finding 5.3 b barrels of recoverable oil (~7 b at the high end) there (this represents a little over 20% of US reserves or 1.5 years of extra production at current US rates).  At its peak (probably in 2020), Alaskan oil production from the ANWR will likely be 800,000 barrels a day.  That's 1/10 the current US production or 4% of what we currently use each day. [John Robb's Radio Weblog]
9:29:11 PM    comment []  trackback []


"Brave Green World"

[American Prospect]: Architect Bill McDonough is an environmental innovator, but his politics are a lot less thoughtful than his buildings.

The authors seem to have the most trouble with McDonough and Company's approach to regulation:

The company's larger vision, he says, is to help the EPA drive the transition away "from a command-and-control culture to one that encourages positive creative activity."

Part of the authors' concern -- McDonough's emphasis on design vs regulation ("ultimately regulation is a signal of design failure") -- is misplaced, imho. Market drivers and business advantage can be far more powerful innovation forces than regulation -- at least for some companies. We see evidence of that in industry after industry after industry, and the adversarial refleces of some environmentalists would do well to relax a bit, and focus on the bad actors.

On the other hand, part of their concern is well placed. The timing of all this matters a great deal. At a moment when environmental nongovernmental organizations are working overtime to defend basic protections such as the Clean Air and Clean Water acts from President Bush and a Republican Congress, America's most famous green architect is in the media dissing regulation as a mostly unnecessary relic.

As with so many contemporary issues, the simple "either/or" answers are not sufficient to the problem. Regulation as we know it is a relic. Unfortunately, it is also not unnecessary. The alternative? For companies, it's what we call "regulatory insulation" -- design products so good, and processes so efficient, that you don't care what the regulators want, because you're years ahead of their wildest dreams; let your competitors spend money on lawyers and lobbysists, while you invest in design and marketing. For governments, it's "regulatory re-engineering" -- redesigning the regulations, and regulatory process itself, with an eye toward the cybernetics of change and a commitment to the underlying driving needs of all the stakeholders.

The payoff is substantial, and not just in reduced operating expenses and legal fees; there's even greater payoff in impact on market share and time to market.

[More to come]
7:31:34 AM    comment []  trackback []


© Copyright 2006 Gil Friend.
 

BlogRoll Me! | Skype me!

My work:
Natural Logic My speaking gigs


Read this blog in:

Deutsch / Español / Français / Italiano / Portuguese


December 2002
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31        
Nov   Jan


So... where you from, Chum?
Locations of visitors to this page


How this works


Recent Posts


Blogs I slog through:


Click here to visit the Radio UserLand website.

Subscribe to "Sustainability" in Radio UserLand.

Click to see the XML version of this web page.


Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.