Fast track, please!

William Gibson once said "The future is already here. It's just not evenly distributed." And he is quite right, since there is no cohesion between the countries in respect to fast implementation of best available environmental technologies. The formal presence of fancy strategies in every country in regard to biodiversity, carbon footprint reduction, climate change, etc., simply is not enough. The governments should motivate and support the movement towards better understanding by the industry of what should and needs to be done, supported by investing in greater acceptance of these measures by the public. Every other formal effort to play "green" would not be justified by the next generations.

Technologies, that could ease the difficult transition to the new green economy are already available and their implementation is not expensive. However, these emerging, high-tech technologies are not well advanced and propagated, and they are still not subject to standards and/or regulations. Therefore governments and international funds should not only improve their recognition of these technologies, providing timely reaction and support, but also should establish routes for their fast commercialization, through specifically designed measures.

The establishment of Emission Trading Schemes under the Kyoto protocol is a step towards the definition and implementation of a motivation mechanism for the carbon intensive industries. Unfortunately, these mechanisms are still inadequate for the needs of the innovators. The emission validation/certification methodologies are used only on paper and present abstract results as they rely upon the amount of fuel purchased by or delivered to the industrial installation, but not on the direct measurement of flue gases emissions. There are green technologies to offset carbon footprint that can demonstrate their economic value, applicability and efficiency, only if direct measurement of stack gases is applied to GHG emissions verification and validation. All this is discussed, bearing in mind the vast amount of funds, already invested by the EU for evaluation and possible implementation of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology, which is too expensive and too risky to be applied... ever. There is a profound need for examination not only of a single technology related to climate change, but exactly the opposite ought to be done - the EU should support the generation, collection and analysis of as much as possible data, information and knowledge for the multitude of available technologies that could have positive effect on the environment.

The problem of being in the middle of a crisis that have never happened before is not its extent, but the lack of a reference point. Even if properly measured, the data could not be properly analysed and evaluated without a correct model. In the case of climate-range crisis, like the one we are now in, the model, could be defined only as wide interval of assumptions. But all of the models, based on fake assumptions, will fail in predicting our future. On the other hand, the problem with failing models is not an exception in model theory, except that in this specific crisis nobody will understand on time which was the incorrect trend. The fact is that we could not be further from answering the following question: "Is it just a crisis or is it a catastrophe?". This is why, just in case, green technologies should be defined as strategic resource and a matter of international security for the people of this planet. And this is why we need a fast track for green technologies.

Green Reasoning

Why should you invest in new (smart and green) technologies if the existing ones are up and running, you have already calculated the costs for environmental fees and charges and you are (still) a profitable business owner or a corporation? These questions are addressed by virtually any business in today's turbulent times, when the economy is on the downward spiral and future seems anything but bright.

One of the answers is hidden in the timing: for how long we can afford to proceed like this and to rely on obsolete technologies? It is possible to redefine a new business zone in the times of a financial and economical crisis. A zone for you, where more and more of consumers' needs are identified and served, profits are growing, business operations are sustainable processes, and developing and performing disruptive innovations are considered vital part of the firm strategy for success.

Another answer is connected with the speed limit across the downward spiral: whether hitting the deflection point of the breakeven point will speed the business upwards or will extinguish the business in times of reduced consumption and decreased budgets. When the money are short and the investments in new technologies are constrict to a non existent number, it is virtually impossible to convince an investor or an executive officer, that the existing technology has to be shred and new, more environmentally friendly technologies have to be ventured. However, wiling to do so, can propel the business in an eco-dimension: both economical and ecological.

But the real question is how fast can you become a part of the new, green economy as your competition's ultimate goal is to get there and thrive? From its answer, you define your place on the map: today and tomorrow. The clock is ticking and there is not much time and much choice left to do otherwise, especially if your competitors are already there.

Yes, you also can!