Professor James Sweeney at the Energy Efficiency Council conference in Sydney  this week

7 December 2012 โ€“ On the word โ€œgreenโ€ and how to make people: 1) really angry about green: 2) take action; 3) back right away, such as GE in its replacement for Ecomagination

So the feds needed to back down on handballing environment protection out to the states, huh?

Wise move. The earth was just about to rise up before them and undermine any good works the prime minister Julia Gillard has done to retrieve some public support. Polls said 85 per cent of Australians would not support the proposed move. Every green in the country was stirring to a major battle. Even the birdwatchers.

Who knows how far an angry electorate can go when the issue drums up the right passion at the right time. Many people remember the Franklin River campaign as likely as any unwinnable fight that was won. It can happen again.

Partly some of the anger comes from outrageous behaviour, such as coal seam fracking that has managed to infuriate across party lines. As it should.

On Sunday, by the way, Paddy Manning, specialist energy writer for Fairfax Media will launch his book, What the Frack? at Gleebooks at 3.30 pm and all welcome.

More anger will come from watching conservative forces such as the World Bank say weโ€™re on track to 4 degrees. Possibly 6 degrees.

But the action will be slow to build because the first with that kind of news is shock. And thatโ€™s a kind of inertia. Whatโ€™s the point, you might ask? The difference between 2 and 4 degrees, as someone said during the week is โ€œhuman civilisationโ€โ€

Yet, radical concerted change can minimise the damage.

If the worldโ€™s governmentsโ€™ meeting at Doha in recent days decided to take such action, a lot could be achieved.

On Wednesday I tapped one of the global leaders in action on energy efficiency, who was speaking at the Energy Efficiency Council national conference in Sydney, for his views.

Professor James Sweeney

Professor James Sweeney is director of the Precourt Energy Efficiency Center at Stanford University.

The professor sees the potential for world governments acting in concert as remote.

โ€œI hope youโ€™re right but I donโ€™t believe youโ€™re right,โ€ Sweeney said.

โ€œFirst when the UN [United Nations] says there we need to limit warming to 2 degrees, itโ€™s not going to happen. All the analysts who are doing the careful modelling say, no way in hell youโ€™re going to get there.โ€

Thereโ€™s a glimmer of hope, though, but sadly from nothing stronger than that โ€œnone of us knows whatโ€™s going to happenโ€.

What intrigues the professor, as far as you suspect he will allow himself, is the impact of superstorm Sandy that hit New York recently.

โ€œI think in the US superstorm Sandy may be a game changer,โ€ Sweeney said.

The reason is that while other storms hit low income areas, โ€œand yes, everyone was sad, this one hit the power centre of the United States. It hit New England and New Jerseyโ€.

And it hit Wall Street.

โ€œAnd while we donโ€™t absolutely know it was climate change because the weather is the weather, the scientific belief is that the probability [of wild weather] increases with warming. One degree difference in the sea is a large change.โ€

So whatโ€™s just happened is that a โ€œwhole group of people of influence in industries like the financial markets are saying maybe we have to do something about thisโ€, Sweeney says.

Of course the denial forces are still very strong.

Sweeney looks to companies such as Exxon Mobil, which say the country needs a carbon price, as hopeful.

Things can indeed look quiet on the surface, says Sweeney. โ€œBut you get enough momentum across the political spectrum and across economic corporations and financial industries that it can reach a tipping point, where itโ€™s not cool to deny. The next step is doing something about it.โ€

China, China
One sign of hope is that there is one country acting โ€œvery aggressivelyโ€ on climate and thatโ€™s the biggest emitter, China.

โ€œChina said in its last five-year plan that they would have very aggressive energy targets per unit of gross domestic product. And they are being very aggressive.

โ€œIf you get the US and China doing something and adding to what Europe is doing, then you donโ€™t need all the other nations.โ€

Talk about something you can do
At the more micro level though, Sweeney finds it counter productive to talk about climate change. Instead he talks about the energy triangle of energy efficiency, energy security and climate change.

โ€œIf I talk about climate policy I see eyes glaze over.โ€

One reason, he suspects is that with climate change people see they can have the same amount of influence as โ€œthe eyebrows of a gnatโ€.

โ€œBut with energy policy people can start envisioning things they can do: they can put solar on their roofs or build a wind machine; they can put in insulation.โ€

Itโ€™s how the human mind works, says Sweeney.

The longer it engages with an issue, the more likely it is to act on it. Thatโ€™s why the advertisers spend so much effort to keep the attention of their customers as long as possible.

Maybe the big fellas are scared too.
GE last Tuesday launched its replacement song and dance for Ecomagination. Itโ€™s called the Industrial Internet and itโ€™s shocking to see there was no mention of climate change or the environment.

The indefatigable Joanne Woo, communications director for GE Global Growth & Operations, Australia & New Zealand had some snappy rationale. Maybe green and sustainability were the wrong words, she told The Fifth Estate. Maybe โ€œgreenโ€ is elitist, because if youโ€™re green youโ€™re positioning yourself as someone who is doing the right thing while all of us should be doing something.

Chief executive Jeff Immelt last year told Reuters โ€œIf I had one thing to do over again I would not have talked so much about greenโ€.

โ€œEven though I believe in global warming and I believe in the scienceโ€ฆ it just took on a connotation that was too elitist; it was too precious and it let opponents think that if you had a green initiative, you didnโ€™t care about jobs. Iโ€™m a businessman. Thatโ€™s all I care about, jobs.โ€

Woo backed up her global boss.

โ€œWe shouldnโ€™t have positioned Ecomagination as a green initiative and about sustainability. Itโ€™s about smart business and energy efficiency. Itโ€™s about skills and how do we respond to resource scarcity.โ€

Itโ€™s more the word green that people have been questioning. Sustainability is broad but it can talk about business in general, Woo said.

โ€œSo sustainability is important to us but itโ€™s more the word green that brings it to an elitist way of thinking.

โ€œEveryone has a role to play in terms play in terms of responding to climate change.

โ€œThatโ€™s why wee say there needs to be a change in everyone.โ€

See what Greenbiz wrote about GE and the Industrial Internet