Engineers are at the forefront of the transition to a carbon constrained world. New technologies are needed that will allow the world to adapt whilst ensuring a good quality of life for all its inhabitants. Only through the innovation and entrepreneurship that engineers can provide will these technologies be conceived and delivered.
However it must be recognised that a vital link is required to facilitate the work of engineers. Connections between the technical and financial communities are essential to achieve desired outcomes. Through an understanding of both new sustainable technologies and the world of finance, the ‘environmental entrepreneur’ can make connections and innovations in how technologies are financed and adopted by the community. The paper considers the theory of innovation cultures and how this can be applied to assist the transition to a carbon constrained world.
The full paper for this abstract was publsihed in the Australian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 5 No.1- Special Issue on Leadership, Business and Management, Engineers Australia.
Please contact info@auscleantech.com.au for a full version of the article.
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Cleantech: Investing in the future
Cleantech: it’s one of those words that once you see it for the first time, it seems to turn up in every newspaper. Although a reasonably common term in US venture capital circles for several years, ‘cleantech’ has until recently been relatively unheard of in Australia.
But what exactly is ‘cleantech’ and why does the definition seem to change depending on where you look?
An example of the guiding principles behind cleantech is provided by the US firm Clean Edge:
A diverse range of products, services and processes that harness renewable materials and energy sources, dramatically reduce the use of natural resources and cut or eliminate emissions and wastes.
Broadly, the term seems to encompass companies that have both environmental and economic benefits.
Cleantech however tends to be a more amorphous industry group than, say, environmental services, and a less rigid investment asset class than, say, financial services.
But what exactly is ‘cleantech’ and why does the definition seem to change depending on where you look?
An example of the guiding principles behind cleantech is provided by the US firm Clean Edge:
A diverse range of products, services and processes that harness renewable materials and energy sources, dramatically reduce the use of natural resources and cut or eliminate emissions and wastes.
Broadly, the term seems to encompass companies that have both environmental and economic benefits.
Cleantech however tends to be a more amorphous industry group than, say, environmental services, and a less rigid investment asset class than, say, financial services.
Sectors that appear to fit into the definition of cleantech without dispute include:
- Renewable energy – wind, solar thermal and photovoltaics, wave, tidal, hydro, geothermal, biomass and biogas;
- Water technologies that increase efficiency;
- Energy efficiency, green buildings and biomaterials;
- Waste management and recycling;
- Energy storage and fuel cell technologies;
- Low emission vehicle technologies; and
- Environmental Services
Other sectors are controversial with some including them within cleantech by reason of their environmental benefits whilst others reject them because of insufficient positive environmental benefits or too many perceived negative impacts. Examples include:
- Biofuels are seen by some as the saviour to high oil prices and energy security issues but by others as the cause of rising food prices, food riots and increasing monoculture.
- Carbon Trading is clearly driving much of the investment behaviour in cleantech, but it is questionable whether the act of trading has any direct environmental benefits.
- ‘Clean’ fossil fuels, including natural gas, coal seam methane, underground coal gasification, gas to liquids, carbon capture and storage and clean coal technologies, have reduced emissions profiles but, as fossil fuels are, at best, only transition resources.
- Nuclear power, along with its associated uranium production and treatment, clearly has a lower emissions profile than the fossil fuel equivalent but deep concerns remain over the environmental and social impacts of uranium transport, usage and waste storage.
- Agri-Businesses are often included in many measures of environmental performance due to their clear interaction with the environment, even though this interaction is not always a positive one for the environment and the communities involved.
It is clear that decisions on what is included as being part of cleantech depends on the viewpoint and vested interest held. Lobby groups, investment fund managers and participating companies all have desired outcomes that help shape their arguments on the definition.
Despite this, cleantech is not is just another term for Socially Responsible Investments (SRI) or Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) performance. Cleantech is a term which embraces organisations whose essence, whose raison d’être, is to provide environmental benefits. SRI and ESG look at incremental improvements in company performance and can be seen as ‘operational hygiene’ measures that find the best in class. Cleantech is about doing ‘more good’ rather than ‘less bad’.
Regardless of the definition and of any environmental benefits that may ensue, the question remains as to whether the sector is one that should be of interest to investors.
Some commentators have dismissed the cleantech phenomenon as being a mere ‘green bubble’, similar to the IT bubble or the current leveraged debt bubble that is currently exploding. However the drivers behind cleantech’s growth are significantly different. Firstly, there are many real assets being constructed to provide core services such as power, water, waste and recycling. Secondly, the demand for these core services is growing due to population growth and increasing wealth. Thirdly, as the world continues to use and deplete its natural resources there is increasing pressure on communities to act sustainably. Finally there is the recognition of climate change and consequent regulatory regimes. This is a separate driver from those above and, whilst it will result in additional growth in some cleantech sub-sectors, it does not underpin the cleantech sector as a whole. As a result, the growth of cleantech as a whole appears to be unstoppable.
The question then is which technologies and which stocks are likely to outperform the cleantech sector benchmarks. Many cleantech companies are early stage and therefore have high levels of risk. Some of these risky companies have the potential to be world leaders and this may be of interest for the speculative investor. Some of the sub-sectors, however, such as water and waste, are more mature and have companies with steady and growing revenues which will be of interest to conservative investors.
Despite the lack of clarity on the definition of cleantech, it therefore seems to offer a range of investment options with the common thread that the investee companies are all working towards environmentally positive outcomes. Given the strength of the drivers behind the cleantech sector, it is an opportunity to invest in the future.
This article was originally published in the ASX monthly newsletter.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Cleantech Leadership Threatened by Ignorance
Australia has the opportunity to be a global leader in cleantech. A strong and robust Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) will facilitate the investment and innovation required to enable many companies to commercialise their clean technologies. However, the Federal Government appears to be heading towards a decision to appease the emissions intensive industries, a disastrous short term approach that would sabotage this leadership opportunity. It is essential that all those who want to see Australia build a long term future understand this issue and make their feelings known.
Every indication from the Government is that it will honour its election commitment to introduce the CPRS in 2010. However, as the potential impacts of the scheme become more fully understood, pressure has been building to ensure a soft start. This softness might be obtained by the setting of very modest targets and the provision of many free permits. An alternative approach would be to fix or cap the price of permits in the market for a number of years to remove volatility. Fixed price permits would merely act as a tax. Emissions would not be seen as carrying any intrinsic value and few tradeable assets could be created by those reducing emissions. Thus the introduction of fixed priced permits or capped prices is a particularly obnoxious and dangerous threat to Australia’s aim to be a leader in the carbon constrained world ahead.
At last month’s Carbon Market Expo, held on the Gold Coast, speaker after speaker implored the Federal Government not to adopt a fixed price or capped permit scheme even if it is pressured into the adoption of a soft start approach. The reasoning behind these arguments put forward by Australian and international investors, traders, cleantech companies and environmental NGOs was that a fixed price would stifle investment. Without investment technologies will not be commercialised and Australia will languish as the rest of the world invents and profits from the technologies of the future. It is true that this may provide a benefit to some of the old emissions intensive industries, but it is no way to build strong foundations for Australia’s future.
Much of the danger lies in the understanding, or lack thereof, by the general public. Lobbying and community engagement by the emissions intensive industries has been well funded and effective. Stories of the future benefits that would be betrayed by a soft policy decision have not gained wide coverage. It appears that the public has been persuaded that a fixed price is the low risk option. What has not been communicated is that a decision to adopt a fixed or capped price is a decision to be a follower rather than a leader in global carbon markets. It is a decision not to build the foundations of a smart country.
I am reminded of two widely discussed public issues, the outcomes of which would no doubt have been different if the issues had been subject to informed and rational debate. The national referendum on whether Australia should become a republic was cleverly manipulated to achieve the outcome desired by the then Prime Minister. Tactics of fear and confusion were used to great effect, together with an emphasis on divisions between republicans. Voters were denied the opportunity simply to say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to the concept of a republic. If such a straight forward question had been posed, most commentators seem convinced that a ‘yes’ vote would have resulted.
The defeated town referendum on the indirect potable recycled water scheme in Toowoomba again shows how the introduction of fear and confusion into a debate can work extremely well for those opposing change.
In both of these, the outcome was not what the voters would have chosen if they had been fully informed and not been led to fear change. The old adage of ‘better the devil you know’ is often applied without reason. Common sense too often faces defeat by the ignorance engendered by a poorly communicated debate.
Australians now stand at a turning point. We can choose to fear change and let the Government be persuaded to make Australia a technology taker by adopting fixed or capped carbon price. Alternatively, we could choose to build the foundations of cleantech leadership through investment and innovation.
The absence of an official referendum should not cloud the great power of the community, of the readers of this column. The Australian Federal Government is influenced by community opinion. It is incumbent on all of us to explain our position clearly and loudly.
This article was originally published in Environmental Management News on 6 November 2008.
Every indication from the Government is that it will honour its election commitment to introduce the CPRS in 2010. However, as the potential impacts of the scheme become more fully understood, pressure has been building to ensure a soft start. This softness might be obtained by the setting of very modest targets and the provision of many free permits. An alternative approach would be to fix or cap the price of permits in the market for a number of years to remove volatility. Fixed price permits would merely act as a tax. Emissions would not be seen as carrying any intrinsic value and few tradeable assets could be created by those reducing emissions. Thus the introduction of fixed priced permits or capped prices is a particularly obnoxious and dangerous threat to Australia’s aim to be a leader in the carbon constrained world ahead.
At last month’s Carbon Market Expo, held on the Gold Coast, speaker after speaker implored the Federal Government not to adopt a fixed price or capped permit scheme even if it is pressured into the adoption of a soft start approach. The reasoning behind these arguments put forward by Australian and international investors, traders, cleantech companies and environmental NGOs was that a fixed price would stifle investment. Without investment technologies will not be commercialised and Australia will languish as the rest of the world invents and profits from the technologies of the future. It is true that this may provide a benefit to some of the old emissions intensive industries, but it is no way to build strong foundations for Australia’s future.
Much of the danger lies in the understanding, or lack thereof, by the general public. Lobbying and community engagement by the emissions intensive industries has been well funded and effective. Stories of the future benefits that would be betrayed by a soft policy decision have not gained wide coverage. It appears that the public has been persuaded that a fixed price is the low risk option. What has not been communicated is that a decision to adopt a fixed or capped price is a decision to be a follower rather than a leader in global carbon markets. It is a decision not to build the foundations of a smart country.
I am reminded of two widely discussed public issues, the outcomes of which would no doubt have been different if the issues had been subject to informed and rational debate. The national referendum on whether Australia should become a republic was cleverly manipulated to achieve the outcome desired by the then Prime Minister. Tactics of fear and confusion were used to great effect, together with an emphasis on divisions between republicans. Voters were denied the opportunity simply to say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to the concept of a republic. If such a straight forward question had been posed, most commentators seem convinced that a ‘yes’ vote would have resulted.
The defeated town referendum on the indirect potable recycled water scheme in Toowoomba again shows how the introduction of fear and confusion into a debate can work extremely well for those opposing change.
In both of these, the outcome was not what the voters would have chosen if they had been fully informed and not been led to fear change. The old adage of ‘better the devil you know’ is often applied without reason. Common sense too often faces defeat by the ignorance engendered by a poorly communicated debate.
Australians now stand at a turning point. We can choose to fear change and let the Government be persuaded to make Australia a technology taker by adopting fixed or capped carbon price. Alternatively, we could choose to build the foundations of cleantech leadership through investment and innovation.
The absence of an official referendum should not cloud the great power of the community, of the readers of this column. The Australian Federal Government is influenced by community opinion. It is incumbent on all of us to explain our position clearly and loudly.
This article was originally published in Environmental Management News on 6 November 2008.
Sunday, October 5, 2008
'Bailing out' the Environment
The last couple of weeks have made history in the management of global financial markets. The threat of a looming global financial crisis has led to the swift implementation of brave ideas by governments and regulators. The response may reveal how the world could avert the looming crises of climate change and resource depletion by backing the clean technology (‘cleantech’) sector.
The United States Federal Government rushed through emergency legislation that will inject up to US$700 billion into the banking system to remove the problem of ‘toxic debt’ from the US financial markets. This debt will apparently include sub-prime mortgages, credit card and other debts that could cause large financial institutions to come under increasing pressure. The financial crisis has already led to the nationalisation of three of the larger US financial institutions and the Government’s response is an attempt to stabilise other companies before they too need to be nationalised. In addition to this ‘bail out’, regulations have been implemented to restrict short selling practices, preventing hedge funds profiteering from, and thereby driving, the collapse of companies. Several markets around the world have emulated this response in varying degrees, with Australia taking the most extreme position.
AT the same time Gordon Brown, the UK Prime Minister, has been calling for an international system of regulation to oversee the global financial system, admitting that it is impossible to effectively regulate the world’s markets on a national basis alone.
Commentary, other than from hedge funds, appears to be generally supportive of the initiatives taken in the US and elsewhere. They are commended as being necessary and courageous moves to shore up the global economy and to reduce the risk of the world descending into financial depression. Confidence in the decisions made has stemmed from deep knowledge of causal factors in economics and the likely responses.
The world of course faces another potential catastrophe that could have an impact far worse than a financial meltdown: continuing global climate change and resource depletion.
Of course, the precise consequences of both financial depression and climate change are uncertain, but the risk of catastrophic outcomes of both is very real. Indeed, the issues involved in both problems are in many ways similar. There are companies that will fail due to pursuing toxic, legacy activities beyond the bounds of a sustainable system; there are groups profiteering from activities detrimental to the health of the overall system; there is a need for government investment combined with regulation; there is a drive towards global regulation; and, if done well, there are immense opportunities to increase both global wealth and well being.
Imagine what would be achieved by a response to the global ecological environment on a par with what we’ve seen for the financial environment. Consider a Bernanke/Paulson type team, with knowledge and confidence in the economic and environmental consequences of their recommendations, persuading a President in one of the richest countries of the world that there is a looming global crisis and that, as one of the worst offenders, there is a responsibility to secure the global system through an investment of several hundreds of billions of dollars.
Not only would such an approach ‘bail out’ the world from a possible catastrophe, but it would also drive a new global industry with the potential to improve the quality of life for all the world’s inhabitants: not merely through increasing wealth, although that is an important aspect, but also by changing the way wealth is created by breaking the ties with emissions and resource depletion.
The adoption of cleantech will happen regardless of such an intervention, but it will be a far less painful experience if the courage and belief demonstrated by recent actions in Washington were to be replicated in the response to global climate change.
This article was originally published in Environmental Management News and on ABC Online. To read the bizarre collection of comments on the latter site follow the link - http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/10/03/2381148.htm
The United States Federal Government rushed through emergency legislation that will inject up to US$700 billion into the banking system to remove the problem of ‘toxic debt’ from the US financial markets. This debt will apparently include sub-prime mortgages, credit card and other debts that could cause large financial institutions to come under increasing pressure. The financial crisis has already led to the nationalisation of three of the larger US financial institutions and the Government’s response is an attempt to stabilise other companies before they too need to be nationalised. In addition to this ‘bail out’, regulations have been implemented to restrict short selling practices, preventing hedge funds profiteering from, and thereby driving, the collapse of companies. Several markets around the world have emulated this response in varying degrees, with Australia taking the most extreme position.
AT the same time Gordon Brown, the UK Prime Minister, has been calling for an international system of regulation to oversee the global financial system, admitting that it is impossible to effectively regulate the world’s markets on a national basis alone.
Commentary, other than from hedge funds, appears to be generally supportive of the initiatives taken in the US and elsewhere. They are commended as being necessary and courageous moves to shore up the global economy and to reduce the risk of the world descending into financial depression. Confidence in the decisions made has stemmed from deep knowledge of causal factors in economics and the likely responses.
The world of course faces another potential catastrophe that could have an impact far worse than a financial meltdown: continuing global climate change and resource depletion.
Of course, the precise consequences of both financial depression and climate change are uncertain, but the risk of catastrophic outcomes of both is very real. Indeed, the issues involved in both problems are in many ways similar. There are companies that will fail due to pursuing toxic, legacy activities beyond the bounds of a sustainable system; there are groups profiteering from activities detrimental to the health of the overall system; there is a need for government investment combined with regulation; there is a drive towards global regulation; and, if done well, there are immense opportunities to increase both global wealth and well being.
Imagine what would be achieved by a response to the global ecological environment on a par with what we’ve seen for the financial environment. Consider a Bernanke/Paulson type team, with knowledge and confidence in the economic and environmental consequences of their recommendations, persuading a President in one of the richest countries of the world that there is a looming global crisis and that, as one of the worst offenders, there is a responsibility to secure the global system through an investment of several hundreds of billions of dollars.
Not only would such an approach ‘bail out’ the world from a possible catastrophe, but it would also drive a new global industry with the potential to improve the quality of life for all the world’s inhabitants: not merely through increasing wealth, although that is an important aspect, but also by changing the way wealth is created by breaking the ties with emissions and resource depletion.
The adoption of cleantech will happen regardless of such an intervention, but it will be a far less painful experience if the courage and belief demonstrated by recent actions in Washington were to be replicated in the response to global climate change.
This article was originally published in Environmental Management News and on ABC Online. To read the bizarre collection of comments on the latter site follow the link - http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/10/03/2381148.htm
Friday, September 26, 2008
CPRS Green Paper Submission
Plan to Build Australia as a Centre of Excellence for Clean Technology
Australian CleanTech made a submission to the Department of Climate Change on the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Green Paper. The submission focussed on how to best secure the long term opportunities that are being presented by the transition to a low carbon economy rather than focussing on short term gains or losses by industry participants. A seven point plan is presented in this submission with an overview presented below.
For a full copy of the submission see http://www.climatechange.gov.au/greenpaper/consultation/submissions.html or request a copy at info@auscleantech.com.au
Stage 1 - Carbon Risk: Don’t back long term losers
Understand the carbon risk of current Australian industries and make sure that, other than transitional measures, we do not back those industries that will inevitably decline as carbon pricing increases. Australia will not deliver a prosperous future by being the last to be supporting legacy industries.
Stage 2 - Facilitate Easy Wins: Back Energy Efficiency Service Providers
Back the suppliers and service providers of the ‘easy wins’ for emissions reduction through matched expansion funding. Energy efficiency products and services will provide the quickest return on investment. By investing in the service providers rather than grants to emitters there will be greater and longer term economic development from generating expertise and commercial knowledge, rather than simply providing greater longevity for single companies.
Stage 3 – Build Supply Side Capability: Cleantech Parks – Promote and support the development of sustainable manufacturing and innovation hubs. Examples of State based initiatives include the Tonsly Park proposal in South Australia and the Springfield development in Queensland. To make these true successes, they need to very specifically target and attract Australian and international companies that are or have the chance to play on the world stage. This process should also look at attracting industries at varying points in their maturity.
Stage 4 – Build the Demand Side through the Australian Climate Initiative
Taking the Clinton Climate Initiative (CCI) as a template, there may be an opportunity to stimulate the sustainable manufacturing initiatives of Stage 3 by effectively forming a buying group of local councils and State and Federal Government departments. To do this on an Australian scale, an ‘Australian Climate Initiative’ (ACI) would only require an initial group of several State and Federal Government departments and some key Councils. Through publicity and exposure, others would be encouraged to join across all three tiers of Government.
Stage 5 - Local Empowerment: Facilitate Local Innovation
Promote projects and provide facilitation services to enable local councils and local communities to develop smaller scale projects in their own area. This will allow the community to feel part of the solution, will harness many more hands, will attract greater and more diverse investment models and will deliver significant community behaviour change. A Victorian example is the Hepburn Wind Farm project. Another example is the proposed Just Peachy project in the northern suburbs of Adelaide that combines urban regeneration, increased social capital underpinned by the growth in sustainable businesses.
Stage 6 – Negotiate Infrastructure Hurdles
There are some large scale infrastructure projects that are unlikely to be developed in the short term without Government leadership. If these projects are delivered, however, they will provide a step change in the delivery of new technologies and a spring board for the country to become a centre of excellence. The best example of this is a High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) cable that could be constructed from the renewable energy resource rich areas of the country to the energy demand centres.
Stage 7 – Demonstrate Success: Power Parks
Professor Stephen Schneider from Stanford University suggested the South Australian Government develop power parks promoting multiple low emissions technologies and ‘showcase the State as a centre for innovation in greenhouse emissions reduction and renewable energy development’. This concept could be developed across the country with demonstration facilities in specific sectors show casing the best of breed for many technologies.
Australian CleanTech made a submission to the Department of Climate Change on the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Green Paper. The submission focussed on how to best secure the long term opportunities that are being presented by the transition to a low carbon economy rather than focussing on short term gains or losses by industry participants. A seven point plan is presented in this submission with an overview presented below.
For a full copy of the submission see http://www.climatechange.gov.au/greenpaper/consultation/submissions.html or request a copy at info@auscleantech.com.au
Stage 1 - Carbon Risk: Don’t back long term losers
Understand the carbon risk of current Australian industries and make sure that, other than transitional measures, we do not back those industries that will inevitably decline as carbon pricing increases. Australia will not deliver a prosperous future by being the last to be supporting legacy industries.
Stage 2 - Facilitate Easy Wins: Back Energy Efficiency Service Providers
Back the suppliers and service providers of the ‘easy wins’ for emissions reduction through matched expansion funding. Energy efficiency products and services will provide the quickest return on investment. By investing in the service providers rather than grants to emitters there will be greater and longer term economic development from generating expertise and commercial knowledge, rather than simply providing greater longevity for single companies.
Stage 3 – Build Supply Side Capability: Cleantech Parks – Promote and support the development of sustainable manufacturing and innovation hubs. Examples of State based initiatives include the Tonsly Park proposal in South Australia and the Springfield development in Queensland. To make these true successes, they need to very specifically target and attract Australian and international companies that are or have the chance to play on the world stage. This process should also look at attracting industries at varying points in their maturity.
Stage 4 – Build the Demand Side through the Australian Climate Initiative
Taking the Clinton Climate Initiative (CCI) as a template, there may be an opportunity to stimulate the sustainable manufacturing initiatives of Stage 3 by effectively forming a buying group of local councils and State and Federal Government departments. To do this on an Australian scale, an ‘Australian Climate Initiative’ (ACI) would only require an initial group of several State and Federal Government departments and some key Councils. Through publicity and exposure, others would be encouraged to join across all three tiers of Government.
Stage 5 - Local Empowerment: Facilitate Local Innovation
Promote projects and provide facilitation services to enable local councils and local communities to develop smaller scale projects in their own area. This will allow the community to feel part of the solution, will harness many more hands, will attract greater and more diverse investment models and will deliver significant community behaviour change. A Victorian example is the Hepburn Wind Farm project. Another example is the proposed Just Peachy project in the northern suburbs of Adelaide that combines urban regeneration, increased social capital underpinned by the growth in sustainable businesses.
Stage 6 – Negotiate Infrastructure Hurdles
There are some large scale infrastructure projects that are unlikely to be developed in the short term without Government leadership. If these projects are delivered, however, they will provide a step change in the delivery of new technologies and a spring board for the country to become a centre of excellence. The best example of this is a High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) cable that could be constructed from the renewable energy resource rich areas of the country to the energy demand centres.
Stage 7 – Demonstrate Success: Power Parks
Professor Stephen Schneider from Stanford University suggested the South Australian Government develop power parks promoting multiple low emissions technologies and ‘showcase the State as a centre for innovation in greenhouse emissions reduction and renewable energy development’. This concept could be developed across the country with demonstration facilities in specific sectors show casing the best of breed for many technologies.
Monday, September 1, 2008
Cleantech Growth through Collaboration
Tangible cleantech outcomes can only be effectively achieved through collaboration between the four core groups of cleantech participants and by adopting a four point collaboration strategy.
The four core participant groups of the cleantech industry are business, governments, researchers and the finance community. Extraordinary outcomes will be achieved by combining the knowledge, capacity and resources of each of these groups.
The combination of innovative research, business needs, commercialisation skills, financial drivers and all three tiers of Government can deliver solutions that not only meet environmental needs but also deliver economic and social dividends. If any one of the core groups is missed from any stage of the process then the result will be, at best, sub-optimal.
Collaboration between the core groups must occur throughout the lifecycle of the project. The adoption of a four point collaboration strategy facilitates behaviours which lead to cleantech innovation and growth.
The four core participant groups of the cleantech industry are business, governments, researchers and the finance community. Extraordinary outcomes will be achieved by combining the knowledge, capacity and resources of each of these groups.
The combination of innovative research, business needs, commercialisation skills, financial drivers and all three tiers of Government can deliver solutions that not only meet environmental needs but also deliver economic and social dividends. If any one of the core groups is missed from any stage of the process then the result will be, at best, sub-optimal.
Collaboration between the core groups must occur throughout the lifecycle of the project. The adoption of a four point collaboration strategy facilitates behaviours which lead to cleantech innovation and growth.
- Strategy 1 - Networks. Cleantech networks are starting to emerge. They provide valuable forums for making new connections and starting new discussions. One example is the Adelaide Cleantech Network, which organises educational events to facilitate cleantech growth in addition to other opportunities for members of the core groups to meet and exchange information and opinions.
- Strategy 2 – Drive Demand. Through establishing buying groups of companies, government departments, local councils or businesses, it is possible to jump start emerging technologies.
- Step 3 – Drive Innovation. The establishment of cleantech manufacturing and development parks creates and enables the positive interdependencies between researchers, companies and financiers. This enhances product development both in terms of quality and time to market.
- Step 4 – Demonstrate Success. Highly publicised demonstration parks or projects are required to provide access to multiple technologies in-situ. The successful technologies are likely to be those that were conceived at network events and borne from the impetus of buying groups and cleantech parks.
Amidst the noise of emissions intensive industries crying foul, the voice of opportunity is starting to be heard. Grasping this opportunity requires the implementation of a comprehensive collaboration strategy that brings together the four core groups of cleantech participants. Governments and other facilitators can lead this strategy, but it requires commitment from all four groups for it to succeed. Once implemented, the multiple dividend streams of cleantech will be fully unleashed.
This is an edited extract of an article that was originally published on Environmental Management News. For a full version of the article please email info@auscleantech.com.au
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Adelaide Cleantech Network - Grants & Investment Seminar
The First Adelaide Cleantech Network Seminar was held on Tuesday 2 September 2008 at the National Wine Centre in AdelaideThe high level seminar was organised by the Adelaide Cleantech Network, the only organisation of its kind in Australia. The conference brought together representatives of business, finance, government and academia and promoted collaboration across these groups to stimulate the growth of cleantech companies.
Commenting on the event, John O’Brien, Managing Director of Australian CleanTech said that Australia will adapt quickly to a future of low emissions and resource constraints by providing an environment for new companies and technologies to flourish. “Maintaining and protecting existing industries is important in the short term, but it does not result in a leadership position in the long run,” he said.
“Adelaide is leading the way in demonstrating how the collaboration between business, finance, government and academia can produce sustainable companies providing investment returns and economic development.”
The first session of the seminar focussed on State and Federal Government grants and incentives available to cleantech companies. This included one of the few good news stories from the closure of Mitsubishi’s Tonsely Park plant. The Federal and State Governments have jointly launched the South Australian Innovation and Investment Fund which will provide up to $30m for investment in new manufacturing ventures. Another grant that was discussed was the Federal Government’s Climate Ready Grant that will provide up to $5m of matched funding to successful applicants.
Show casing a successful case study, Anthony Kittel, the Managing Director of Lonsdale-based REDARC talked about his company’s success in securing a multi-million dollar grant that has enabled it to expand its operations.
The second session of the PricewaterhouseCoopers event turned the focus from companies to investors. It started with an overview of the Rudd Government’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme along with the current state of lobbying by ‘big business’ looking to protect and forward their interests. Other topics included an overview of picking stock market winners and losers for a carbon constrained world and the investment strategy of South African bank, Investec, to make money from cleantech.
In the last session of the morning, Fiona Waterhouse from the Australian Cleantech Marketplace explained the new ways Australian investors can access environmentally friendly investments. Included was a commentary on the world-first Sustainable Investment Market, the Sydney based stock exchange that will only list cleantech companies.
Cleantech investment differs from ‘socially responsible investments’ and their ilk, focusing only on companies whose output positively enhances communities and ecologies. “It is about doing ‘more good’ rather than ‘less bad’,” Mr O’Brien explained.
To round off the day IBM Australia’s Malcolm Mackey explained how IT is the enabler of both the technologies and investment returns associated with cleantech.
Australian CleanTech has estimated that, if the Australian growth matches the global forecasts, annual revenue for the Australian cleantech sector could exceed $40Bn within the next 10 years.
“Successful cleantech investments are about looking at future trends and understanding which technologies will achieve both economic and sustainable development,” Mr O’Brien said.
“The drivers behind cleantech are much more than just climate change. Increasing wealth, increasing populations and decreasing natural resources require the world to adapt to cleaner technologies,” he added.
Mr O’Brien concluded by dismissing what some commentators have coined as a ‘green bubble’, similar to the IT bubble of the turn of the century. “With many real assets being constructed and global demand for its products and services increasing, the cleantech revolution is here to stay.”
“Finally we have a solution to the dichotomy between good returns and positive environmental investments. We now have a way to make money and save the world.”
EMAIL acn@auscleantech.com.au FOR INFORMATION ON FUTURE EVENTS
Saturday, August 2, 2008
The Cleantech Cure for Climate Fatigue
A new challenge for those fighting the effects of climate change is on the horizon - ‘climate fatigue’. Each day the public is bombarded with terrifying prognoses for the future that they and their forebears have created.
Many people are understandably confused about the possible effects of climate change and feel an inability to make any meaningful difference. They sense a lack of control and eventually fear will give way to resigned boredom and the distractions of more immediate and local issues. So, ironically, as media exposure on the issue of climate change increases so too does the danger of climate fatigue.
Yet it is essential that individuals and their communities do stay motivated and engaged with the solutions to climate change – it is not enough simply to rely upon scientists and politicians to alleviate the consequences. Cleantech provides the solutions that will deliver both global and local benefits and ensure the community engagement is maintained.
“Climate fatigue” may be compared with the well documented phenomenon of famine fatigue. As news of ever more famines continue however, the length and depth of compassionate feelings reduces until there is tendency to accept famines as unavoidable.
Famine fatigue or, more generally, compassion fatigue occurs fastest when the suffering is far removed. Climate fatigue is no different, as shown by Putin’s retort that Russians are unlikely to suffer from a slight rise in temperature, and the effects of climate change are often seen as a problem belonging to the distant future and far flung places of the world. However, recent Australian weather conditions – both floods and droughts – have focussed many Australians on the immediacy and relevancy of the problems created by climate change. Extreme weather patterns elsewhere, such as the US and parts of Europe, have had the same effect. Enthusiasm for change is high, both here and abroad, and fatigue has yet to set in.
To harness this enthusiasm and secure its benefits requires two aspects: firstly, local benefits must be visible to communities so that the benefits of change are clear; and secondly, networks and forums must be established to facilitate new connections and enable new collaborations. This is where cleantech comes in.
Focusing on local benefits whilst also delivering part of a national or international solution is not easy. It requires collaboration and understanding between business, investors, academia, all three tiers of government and most importantly the general public. Providing a forum to have these conversations is a vital first step to delivering the greatest benefits from changes that are going to be required as a result of climate change.
One example of this first step is the recently formed Adelaide Cleantech Network. This brings together all of the disparate groups and enables discussions to start on wider more ambitious solutions.
By changing the story from one of worry to one of opportunity, cleantech alters the whole dynamic of climate change. It is a twist on the concept “think global - act local” which has historically been seen as taking local detrimental actions to achieve global benefits. Instead this is thinking about worrying global events and turning them into an excuse to deliver local benefits.
By focussing on how cleantech solutions can deliver local, as well as global, benefits and by starting new conversations and collaborative relationships, we have the opportunity to make climate change seen as the great motivator to a better world.
This is an extract of the full article that was first published Environmental Management News. For a full version of the article please email info@auscleantech.com.au
Many people are understandably confused about the possible effects of climate change and feel an inability to make any meaningful difference. They sense a lack of control and eventually fear will give way to resigned boredom and the distractions of more immediate and local issues. So, ironically, as media exposure on the issue of climate change increases so too does the danger of climate fatigue.
Yet it is essential that individuals and their communities do stay motivated and engaged with the solutions to climate change – it is not enough simply to rely upon scientists and politicians to alleviate the consequences. Cleantech provides the solutions that will deliver both global and local benefits and ensure the community engagement is maintained.
“Climate fatigue” may be compared with the well documented phenomenon of famine fatigue. As news of ever more famines continue however, the length and depth of compassionate feelings reduces until there is tendency to accept famines as unavoidable.
Famine fatigue or, more generally, compassion fatigue occurs fastest when the suffering is far removed. Climate fatigue is no different, as shown by Putin’s retort that Russians are unlikely to suffer from a slight rise in temperature, and the effects of climate change are often seen as a problem belonging to the distant future and far flung places of the world. However, recent Australian weather conditions – both floods and droughts – have focussed many Australians on the immediacy and relevancy of the problems created by climate change. Extreme weather patterns elsewhere, such as the US and parts of Europe, have had the same effect. Enthusiasm for change is high, both here and abroad, and fatigue has yet to set in.
To harness this enthusiasm and secure its benefits requires two aspects: firstly, local benefits must be visible to communities so that the benefits of change are clear; and secondly, networks and forums must be established to facilitate new connections and enable new collaborations. This is where cleantech comes in.
Focusing on local benefits whilst also delivering part of a national or international solution is not easy. It requires collaboration and understanding between business, investors, academia, all three tiers of government and most importantly the general public. Providing a forum to have these conversations is a vital first step to delivering the greatest benefits from changes that are going to be required as a result of climate change.
One example of this first step is the recently formed Adelaide Cleantech Network. This brings together all of the disparate groups and enables discussions to start on wider more ambitious solutions.
By changing the story from one of worry to one of opportunity, cleantech alters the whole dynamic of climate change. It is a twist on the concept “think global - act local” which has historically been seen as taking local detrimental actions to achieve global benefits. Instead this is thinking about worrying global events and turning them into an excuse to deliver local benefits.
By focussing on how cleantech solutions can deliver local, as well as global, benefits and by starting new conversations and collaborative relationships, we have the opportunity to make climate change seen as the great motivator to a better world.
This is an extract of the full article that was first published Environmental Management News. For a full version of the article please email info@auscleantech.com.au
Thursday, July 10, 2008
What is Cleantech?
On forming Australian CleanTech early in 2007, I was asked several times whether I would be cleaning carpets and curtains. Although understanding of the term has now grown to a point where I no longer face queries about rejuvenating soft furnishings, the actual definition of ‘cleantech’ seems to change depending where you look.
John O’Brien, Australian CleanTech
Guiding principles may be given in an attempt to define what cleantech is. An example is the following from US firm Clean Edge, which states cleantech is:
A diverse range of products, services and processes that harness renewable materials and energy sources, dramatically reduce the use of natural resources and cut or eliminate emissions and wastes.
Broadly, cleantech seems to encompass companies that have both environmental and economic benefits.However, each individual is left to decide whether a particular industry sector fits within the spirit of cleantech as defined by such principles. Some organisations clearly state what they are and are not including in their definition, but then do not go on to explain how these decisions have been made.
The term cleantech therefore tends to be a more amorphous industry group than, say, environmental services, and a less rigid investment asset class than, say, financial services.
Sectors that appear to fit into the definition of cleantech without dispute include:
John O’Brien, Australian CleanTech
Guiding principles may be given in an attempt to define what cleantech is. An example is the following from US firm Clean Edge, which states cleantech is:
A diverse range of products, services and processes that harness renewable materials and energy sources, dramatically reduce the use of natural resources and cut or eliminate emissions and wastes.
Broadly, cleantech seems to encompass companies that have both environmental and economic benefits.However, each individual is left to decide whether a particular industry sector fits within the spirit of cleantech as defined by such principles. Some organisations clearly state what they are and are not including in their definition, but then do not go on to explain how these decisions have been made.
The term cleantech therefore tends to be a more amorphous industry group than, say, environmental services, and a less rigid investment asset class than, say, financial services.
Sectors that appear to fit into the definition of cleantech without dispute include:
- Renewable energy – wind, solar thermal and photovoltaics, wave, tidal, hydro, geothermal, biomass and biogas;
- Water technologies that increase efficiency;
- Energy efficiency, green buildings and biomaterials;
- Waste management and recycling;
- Energy storage and fuel cell technologies;
- Low emission vehicle technologies; and
- Environmental Services.
Other sectors are controversial with some including them within cleantech by reason of their environmental benefits whilst other reject them because of insufficient positive environmental benefits, or too many perceived negative impacts. Examples include:
Biofuel, an emotive subject seen by some as the saviour to high oil prices and energy security issues but by others as the cause of rising food prices, food riots and increasing monoculture.
Carbon Trading is clearly driving much of the investment behaviour in cleantech, but it is questionable whether the act of trading has any direct environmental benefits.
‘Clean’ fossil fuels include natural gas, coal seam methane, underground coal gasification, gas to liquids, carbon capture and storage and clean coal technologies.
Nuclear power clearly has a lower emissions profile than the fossil fuel equivalent and is highly likely to form part of the long term global solution to climate change. However, deep concerns remain over the environmental and social impacts of uranium transport, usage and waste storage.
Agri-Businesses, included in many measures of environmental performance due to their clear interaction with the environment. Yet this interaction is not always a positive one for the environment and the communities involved.
It is clear that decisions on what counts as cleantech depends on the viewpoint and vested interest held. Lobby groups, investment fund managers and participating companies all have desired outcomes that help shape their arguments on the definition.
Despite this, cleantech is not is just another term for Socially Responsible Investments (SRI) or Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) performance. Cleantech is a term which embraces organisations whose essence, whose raison d’être, is to provide environmental benefits.SRI and ESG look at incremental improvements in company performance and can be seen as ‘operational hygiene’ measures that find the best in class. Cleantech is about doing ‘more good’ rather than ‘less bad’.
To those who ask ‘What is cleantech and what does it encompass?’ there is no definitive answer as both subjective opinion and vested interests are involved. However, this should not detract from the multiple benefits available to investors, communities, employees and society from the work of the cleantech industry.
This is an extract of the full article that was published Environmental Management News. For a full version of the article please email info@auscleantech.com.au
Adelaide GreenDrinks
Cultivating an Eco-Minded CommunityFirst meeting: 8th July ‘08.
Venue: Sangria, Corner of Gouger and Morphett St, Adelaide
Regular meetings : Second Tuesday of the month.
Contact Details: suhit.anantula [at] worldisgreen.com or 0433 601 501
Next meeting: 12th August, 2008
People are the key. And the best way to learn more and make life interesting is to meet more people. And what better way to do that than to have a regular place to chill out, drink and discuss.
And in the green area, there is something called Green Drinks managed by Edwin at Biothinking. Green Drinks is an organic, self-organising network running in 380 cities worldwide.
Australian cities like Melbourne and Sydney have their version of the Green Drinks and Adelaide lacked this. Well, not anymore.
For more information see http://worldisgreen.com/
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
“Make Money and Save the World”
Cleantech Index Outperforms Market for Second Year Running
The ACT Australian CleanTech Index has outperformed both the S&P ASX200 and the S&P Small Ordinaries for the second year running.
Over the 2008 fiscal year, the ACT Australian CleanTech Index recorded a loss of 16.0%, better than the S&P ASX200’s loss of 16.4% and significantly better than the S&P ASX Small Ordinaries’ loss of 23.0%.
The Index is the initiative of Australian CleanTech which provides research services and investment analysis of the cleantech sector.
Commenting on the results, John O’Brien, Managing Director of Australian CleanTech said that the strength in the cleantech concept comes from its diversity. Over the year some of the cleantech sub-sectors performed extremely poorly with the Biofuels industry continuing to tank. However, the waste sub-sector held up the index this year through its strong annual growth. In previous years, it has been sub-sectors such as Geothermal that have provided this growth.
“Successful cleantech investments are about looking at future trends and understanding what technologies will achieve both economic and sustainable development,” Mr O’Brien said.
“The drivers behind cleantech are much more than just climate change. Increasing wealth, increasing populations and decreasing natural resources require the world to adapt to cleaner technologies,” he added.
The ACT Australian CleanTech Index monitors companies across 14 industry sectors: solar; wind; biofuel; water; waste management; energy efficiency; energy storage & fuel cells; wave, tidal & hydro; biogas generation; vehicle technologies; geothermal; carbon trading; environmental service providers; and ‘other’ additional companies providing beneficial environmental and economic outcomes.
Cleantech focuses on companies whose output positively enhances the communities and ecologies in which they reside. “It is about doing ‘more good’ rather than ‘less bad’,” Mr O’Brien explained.
The market capitalisation of the 73 stocks in the ACT Australian CleanTech Index now exceeds A$15 billion. The best performers over the 2008 fiscal year were Sims Metal Group and Cougar Energy with some of the many that performed poorly including Traffic Technologies, Energy Developments, Viridis, Australian Ethical Investments and Ceramic Fuel Cells.
The performance of the seven sub-indices underneath the ACT Australian CleanTech Index reflected the wider market with strong gains in FY07 offset by losses in FY08. The ACT Wind Index, ACT Waste Index and the ACT Geothermal Index are all showing strong net gains over the two years with the ACT Environmental Services Index joining the ACT Biofuels Index with notable losses.
Mr O’Brien concluded “Some commentators have dismissed the cleantech phenomenon as being a mere ‘green bubble’, similar to the IT bubble of the turn of the century. With many real assets being constructed and global demand for the products and services increasing, the cleantech revolution is here to stay”.
“Finally we have a solution to the dichotomy between good returns and positive environmental investments. We now have a way to make money and save the world.”
Over the 2008 fiscal year, the ACT Australian CleanTech Index recorded a loss of 16.0%, better than the S&P ASX200’s loss of 16.4% and significantly better than the S&P ASX Small Ordinaries’ loss of 23.0%.
The Index is the initiative of Australian CleanTech which provides research services and investment analysis of the cleantech sector.
Commenting on the results, John O’Brien, Managing Director of Australian CleanTech said that the strength in the cleantech concept comes from its diversity. Over the year some of the cleantech sub-sectors performed extremely poorly with the Biofuels industry continuing to tank. However, the waste sub-sector held up the index this year through its strong annual growth. In previous years, it has been sub-sectors such as Geothermal that have provided this growth.
“Successful cleantech investments are about looking at future trends and understanding what technologies will achieve both economic and sustainable development,” Mr O’Brien said.
“The drivers behind cleantech are much more than just climate change. Increasing wealth, increasing populations and decreasing natural resources require the world to adapt to cleaner technologies,” he added.
The ACT Australian CleanTech Index monitors companies across 14 industry sectors: solar; wind; biofuel; water; waste management; energy efficiency; energy storage & fuel cells; wave, tidal & hydro; biogas generation; vehicle technologies; geothermal; carbon trading; environmental service providers; and ‘other’ additional companies providing beneficial environmental and economic outcomes.
Cleantech focuses on companies whose output positively enhances the communities and ecologies in which they reside. “It is about doing ‘more good’ rather than ‘less bad’,” Mr O’Brien explained.
The market capitalisation of the 73 stocks in the ACT Australian CleanTech Index now exceeds A$15 billion. The best performers over the 2008 fiscal year were Sims Metal Group and Cougar Energy with some of the many that performed poorly including Traffic Technologies, Energy Developments, Viridis, Australian Ethical Investments and Ceramic Fuel Cells.
The performance of the seven sub-indices underneath the ACT Australian CleanTech Index reflected the wider market with strong gains in FY07 offset by losses in FY08. The ACT Wind Index, ACT Waste Index and the ACT Geothermal Index are all showing strong net gains over the two years with the ACT Environmental Services Index joining the ACT Biofuels Index with notable losses.
Mr O’Brien concluded “Some commentators have dismissed the cleantech phenomenon as being a mere ‘green bubble’, similar to the IT bubble of the turn of the century. With many real assets being constructed and global demand for the products and services increasing, the cleantech revolution is here to stay”.
“Finally we have a solution to the dichotomy between good returns and positive environmental investments. We now have a way to make money and save the world.”
Inaugural Adelaide Cleantech Networking Drinks
The inaugural Adelaide Cleantech Networking drinks were held on Tuesday 1 July 2008. Over 80 people attended the event and made the inaugural drinks a great success. Attendees included representatives of water, energy, waste, carbon and environmental services companies. There was also a good representation from the finance industry with companies attending from venture capital, private equity, stockbroking and financial services. Finally there were also people from Government agencies and professional services firms.
The sponsor for the evening was Playford Capital and the event was kindly hosted in the rooms of the Water Industry Alliance. Playford Capital announced a cleantech deal that they closed the previous week with Ember Technologies to enable them to commercialise their energy efficiency technology.
The next Adelaide Cleantech Network drinks will be held on Tuesday 5th August. If you are interested in attending or learning more of the Adelaide Cleantech Network please email acn@auscleantech.com.au.
Friday, June 6, 2008
Adelaide Cleantech Network Events
The Adelaide Cleantech Network will establish South Australia as a leading national and international provider of Clean Technology services, products and innovation. The concept has been developed and will be launched by Australian CleanTech in association with industry and State Government partners. The Adelaide Cleantech Network was officially launched at the Beyond Carbon 2008 Conference on 3 June 2008 in Adelaide.To receive further information about all events, please email acn@auscleantech.com.au with Register for the Adelaide Cleantech Network in the Subject line.
Are you interested in Cleantech?
The cleantech sector comprises industries with both environmental and economic benefits. Sub-sectors include renewable energy (wind, solar, wave, tidal, hydro and geothermal), water, waste and recycling, energy efficiency, green buildings, biomaterials, energy storage and fuel cells, environmental service providers and carbon traders.
Monthly Drinks
To provide a regular and informal environment for collaboration and networking, the Adelaide Cleantech Network will hold monthly drinks and nibbles on the:
FIRST TUESDAY OF EVERY MONTH
5:30 until 7:00pm
The Adelaide Cleantech Network Drinks begin on Tuesday 1 July 2008. Bookings are essential for these events.
Formal Seminars
More formal seminars on specific topics will be held on the
FIRST TUESDAY OF EVERY QUARTER
These seminars will vary in format but will generally conclude by joining the monthly Adelaide Cleantech Network drinks. The Adelaide Cleantech Network formal seminars begin on Tuesday 2 September 2008.
The Adelaide Cleantech Network aims to provide education and links to the finance industry and government services.
Investor involvement ranges from angel investors and venture capital companies that can provide early stage capital through to larger financial institutions able to fund major infrastructure projects. These attendees find the sector highly attractive because the participating companies are involved in high growth industries, have strong reputational capital and offer a positive outlook.
A diverse range of industry participants including industry associations, Government departments and Universities are involved in the Adelaide Cleantech Network. Global connections are provided through international affiliated organisations.
Take the Opportunity!
Be part of the Adelaide Cleantech Network and help enable South Australia to become a centre of excellence for cleantech.
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Beyond Carbon 2008
Australian CleanTech was one of the organising partner of the Beyond Carbon 2008 conference held in Adelaide on 3-5 June 2008. Over 250 people attended the first day and the launch of the Adelaide Cleantech Network.
Beyond Carbon 2008 explored the challenges and opportunities presented by the transition to a carbon constrained economy, from multiple perspectives and for multiple audiences.
The conference included business and local government days, public seminars, a High School Climate Ambassador workshop and a dinner for 50 experts to provide guidance on how the world can take advantages of the opportunities provided by the necessity to transition to a carbon constrained economy.
The dialogue will continue at the Beyond Carbon 2009 event in June 2009.
The content of the business day was summarised at http://worldisgreen.com/
Beyond Carbon 2008 explored the challenges and opportunities presented by the transition to a carbon constrained economy, from multiple perspectives and for multiple audiences.
The conference included business and local government days, public seminars, a High School Climate Ambassador workshop and a dinner for 50 experts to provide guidance on how the world can take advantages of the opportunities provided by the necessity to transition to a carbon constrained economy.
The dialogue will continue at the Beyond Carbon 2009 event in June 2009.
The content of the business day was summarised at http://worldisgreen.com/
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Technology Commercialisation Services
May 2008
Australian CleanTech has launched a Technology Commercialisation service to help companies bring new cleantech technologies to market both in Australia and internationally
Technology Commercialisation
The technology commercialisation services offered include:
· Technology valuation
· Intellectual Property protection strategies
· Marketing strategy development
· Business Plan preparation
· R&D Tax Concession assistance
· Grant application preparation
Basic Commercialisation Package – to assist early stage companies bring their products to market, Australian CleanTech offers an economic commercialisation service consisting of:
· Half-day workshop to develop strategy and guide the preparation of the business plan
· Review of draft documents.
· Distribution to targeted investors both in Australia and internationally.
· The charge for this package is a flat rate to the client of $2,000.
Australian CleanTech can also provide more extensive assistance tailored to meet specific commercialisation needs.
Companies looking for assistance in commercialising their technologies should contact us at john.obrien@auscleantech.com.au or 0419 826 372
Australian CleanTech has launched a Technology Commercialisation service to help companies bring new cleantech technologies to market both in Australia and internationally
Technology Commercialisation
The technology commercialisation services offered include:
· Technology valuation
· Intellectual Property protection strategies
· Marketing strategy development
· Business Plan preparation
· R&D Tax Concession assistance
· Grant application preparation
Basic Commercialisation Package – to assist early stage companies bring their products to market, Australian CleanTech offers an economic commercialisation service consisting of:
· Half-day workshop to develop strategy and guide the preparation of the business plan
· Review of draft documents.
· Distribution to targeted investors both in Australia and internationally.
· The charge for this package is a flat rate to the client of $2,000.
Australian CleanTech can also provide more extensive assistance tailored to meet specific commercialisation needs.
Companies looking for assistance in commercialising their technologies should contact us at john.obrien@auscleantech.com.au or 0419 826 372
Sunday, May 4, 2008
The Unstoppable Growth of Cleantech
May 2008
The Clean Technology sector will be the success story of the next 20 years. Its global revenue has grown exponentially over the last few years and this growth is forecast to continue for many years to come.
Some commentators have dismissed the phenomenon as being a mere ‘green bubble’, similar to the IT bubble of the turn of the century. However the drivers behind cleantech’s growth are significantly different. Firstly, there are many real assets being constructed to provide core services such as power, water, waste and recycling. Secondly, the demand for these core services is growing due to population growth and increasing wealth. Thirdly, as the world continues to use and deplete its natural resources there is increasing pressure on communities to act sustainably. Finally there is the recognition of climate change and consequent regulatory regimes. This is a separate driver from those above and, whilst it will result in additional growth in some cleantech sub-sectors, it does not underpin the cleantech sector as a whole. As a result, the growth of cleantech will be unstoppable.
Research and forecasts by Clean Edge indicate that the clean energy sector alone had global revenues of US$77.3Bn in 2007 and this is forecast to rise to over US$250Bn by 2017.
In Australia, the definitive measure of cleantech performance is the ACT Australian CleanTech Index. This tracks 73 cleantech companies listed on Australian exchanges with combined forecast FY08 revenues of over A$13Bn and a combined market capitalisation at the end of April 2008 of over A$15Bn. The ACT Index outperformed both the S&P/ASX200 and the S&P/ASX Small Ordinaries during the 2006-07 financial year with a gain of 42.9%. Over the first four months of 2008, the ACT Index has again outperformed both of its benchmarks. If the Australian growth matches the global forecasts, annual revenue for the Australian cleantech sector could exceed $40Bn within the next 10 years.
The future for cleantech, both here and abroad, is bright. It has multiple global drivers and government backing which makes it stand out from previous growth industries. As it grows, mainstream corporate Australia will buy in through purchasing and acquisition decisions and this will enable the entire economy to move towards sustainability. By combining industry with investors, the cleantech sector will underpin and be essential for the transition to a sustainable world.
This is an edited extract of an article written by John O'Brien. Full a copy of the full article please contact info@auscleantech.com.au
The Clean Technology sector will be the success story of the next 20 years. Its global revenue has grown exponentially over the last few years and this growth is forecast to continue for many years to come.
Some commentators have dismissed the phenomenon as being a mere ‘green bubble’, similar to the IT bubble of the turn of the century. However the drivers behind cleantech’s growth are significantly different. Firstly, there are many real assets being constructed to provide core services such as power, water, waste and recycling. Secondly, the demand for these core services is growing due to population growth and increasing wealth. Thirdly, as the world continues to use and deplete its natural resources there is increasing pressure on communities to act sustainably. Finally there is the recognition of climate change and consequent regulatory regimes. This is a separate driver from those above and, whilst it will result in additional growth in some cleantech sub-sectors, it does not underpin the cleantech sector as a whole. As a result, the growth of cleantech will be unstoppable.
Research and forecasts by Clean Edge indicate that the clean energy sector alone had global revenues of US$77.3Bn in 2007 and this is forecast to rise to over US$250Bn by 2017.
In Australia, the definitive measure of cleantech performance is the ACT Australian CleanTech Index. This tracks 73 cleantech companies listed on Australian exchanges with combined forecast FY08 revenues of over A$13Bn and a combined market capitalisation at the end of April 2008 of over A$15Bn. The ACT Index outperformed both the S&P/ASX200 and the S&P/ASX Small Ordinaries during the 2006-07 financial year with a gain of 42.9%. Over the first four months of 2008, the ACT Index has again outperformed both of its benchmarks. If the Australian growth matches the global forecasts, annual revenue for the Australian cleantech sector could exceed $40Bn within the next 10 years.
The future for cleantech, both here and abroad, is bright. It has multiple global drivers and government backing which makes it stand out from previous growth industries. As it grows, mainstream corporate Australia will buy in through purchasing and acquisition decisions and this will enable the entire economy to move towards sustainability. By combining industry with investors, the cleantech sector will underpin and be essential for the transition to a sustainable world.
This is an edited extract of an article written by John O'Brien. Full a copy of the full article please contact info@auscleantech.com.au
2020 Ideas
April 2008
I’ve put together some thoughts on climate change policy and actions. They are split into two groups with the first focussing on how to enable the general public to be ‘part of the solution’ and the second on steps the Government can take if it has the courage to face down its detractors.
Being Part of the Solution
To achieve widespread involvement and adoption of climate friendly products and activities, there needs to be an alignment of individual economic benefits with behavioural changes that speed the transition to a low carbon economy. This can be achieved by costing in externalities and encouraging efficient resource use. The proposed Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) will achieve this to some extent for power and manufactured materials and there other emerging schemes that will achieve this for water.
I’ve put together some thoughts on climate change policy and actions. They are split into two groups with the first focussing on how to enable the general public to be ‘part of the solution’ and the second on steps the Government can take if it has the courage to face down its detractors.
Being Part of the Solution
To achieve widespread involvement and adoption of climate friendly products and activities, there needs to be an alignment of individual economic benefits with behavioural changes that speed the transition to a low carbon economy. This can be achieved by costing in externalities and encouraging efficient resource use. The proposed Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) will achieve this to some extent for power and manufactured materials and there other emerging schemes that will achieve this for water.
A more direct, and possibly more successful, involvement in the solution can be through enabling the general public to profit from the growth in clean technology solutions:
- Dedicating, or even mandating, a proportion of superannuation savings to investment in companies that are providing the solutions would certainly spur growth.
- A simple option to encourage take up of household technologies such as solar panels and water tanks, would be for the high street banks to facilitate the costs of such purchases to be added to an existing mortgage.
- Perhaps more interesting are community funded projects such as Hepburn Wind Co-operative in Victoria. Such projects benefit not only the environment but the communities involved as well.
Courage
Australia’s extensive coal reserves lend support to the proposal that it lead global efforts into making carbon capture and storage (CCS) a viable economic and environmental option. However, the doubtful sustainability of filling up reservoirs to store sequestered carbon and the question of large scale cross country liquid carbon pipelines seems to limit the long term viability of CCS.
There are two large scale projects that the Government could pursue that would have significant impacts on reducing the source of emissions as follows:
- In his interim report, Garnaut discussed using the proceeds of the ETS auctions for publicly funded infrastructure to facilitate the uptake of low emissions technologies. To encourage utility scale development utilising Australia’s best resources, a DC power cable network could be laid starting near Ceduna in SA, running through the prime locations for geothermal and solar thermal and connecting into the NSW grid somewhere in the west of the state.
- Given Australia has much of the world’s uranium that we are happy to dig up and sell to the world for use in nuclear power stations, it is difficult to argue against the development of a world’s best practice nuclear plant with an on-site integrated uranium supply and disposal chain.
These are brave calls on long term infrastructure projects that would fundamentally change the country. Will the Government have the courage to follow through and establish the infrastructure to allow the long term exploitation of its greatest sustainable assets of natural nuclear power, wind and solar rather than backing an ‘end of the pipe’ solution for the power source of the industrial revolution?
This is an edited extract of an article written by John O'Brien. Full a copy of the full article please contact info@auscleantech.com.au
The Battle for Emissions Trading Profits
March 2008
The debate on the design of the Australian Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) has only just begun. There have been a few opening salvos but, as yet, the battle has hardly started. The fight will be hard because the design of the ETS will make or break individual companies and maybe even entire industries. We should expect the fight to get nasty!
One of the most contentious issues is whether or not emissions intensive industries should be given free permits. This was the approach adopted when the European Union ETS was introduced in an attempt to appease industry and get the scheme approved. Europe however is now back tracking. By their nature, the emissions intensive industries are the very ones that need to change the most for any serious emissions targets to be met. If market mechanisms are implemented that exempts these companies, then an ETS cannot possibly achieve its optimum outcome.
A system that is designed to reduce emissions must of course affect those that produce the most emissions.
The industry groups of the high emitters such as the Australian Industry Greenhouse Network have valid arguments. Why should regulations intervene in a free market? If consumers want to change to other products of better quality or lower price then that is a valid market risk. If Government intervenes, that is regulatory risk and there should be compensation for any losses.
The extent to which profits will be affected will be proportional to the extent to which individual companies have prepared for this moment. Emissions trading will not be a shock to any large company. The world has been moving towards it for many years and the well run companies will have recognised this risk and put contingency plans in place.
There should be no pretence that the introduction of an ETS will not have a dramatic impact on the Australian economy. There will be winners and losers and there is big money at stake. The aim of the scheme is to enable a transition to a low carbon economy with the least pain along the way. However, it is inevitable that there will be some local discomfort. However, the birth of the new economy will be eased by wisely spending the significant funds raised from the auction of the permits.
To provide the best outcome for Australia, and to demonstrate the most effective ETS for the world, the Government must adhere to its goal of achieving emissions targets in the most efficient way. It matters not in this context whether profits are lost by large emissions intensive industrial companies or are gained by investors in innovative low emissions companies. In addition, a long term solution requires that threats to jobs in specific sectors or regions have no impact on the policy framework. These emotive arguments must be ignored for the greatest benefit to all.
This is an edited extract of an article written by John O'Brien. Full a copy of the full article please contact info@auscleantech.com.au
The debate on the design of the Australian Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) has only just begun. There have been a few opening salvos but, as yet, the battle has hardly started. The fight will be hard because the design of the ETS will make or break individual companies and maybe even entire industries. We should expect the fight to get nasty!
One of the most contentious issues is whether or not emissions intensive industries should be given free permits. This was the approach adopted when the European Union ETS was introduced in an attempt to appease industry and get the scheme approved. Europe however is now back tracking. By their nature, the emissions intensive industries are the very ones that need to change the most for any serious emissions targets to be met. If market mechanisms are implemented that exempts these companies, then an ETS cannot possibly achieve its optimum outcome.
A system that is designed to reduce emissions must of course affect those that produce the most emissions.
The industry groups of the high emitters such as the Australian Industry Greenhouse Network have valid arguments. Why should regulations intervene in a free market? If consumers want to change to other products of better quality or lower price then that is a valid market risk. If Government intervenes, that is regulatory risk and there should be compensation for any losses.
The extent to which profits will be affected will be proportional to the extent to which individual companies have prepared for this moment. Emissions trading will not be a shock to any large company. The world has been moving towards it for many years and the well run companies will have recognised this risk and put contingency plans in place.
There should be no pretence that the introduction of an ETS will not have a dramatic impact on the Australian economy. There will be winners and losers and there is big money at stake. The aim of the scheme is to enable a transition to a low carbon economy with the least pain along the way. However, it is inevitable that there will be some local discomfort. However, the birth of the new economy will be eased by wisely spending the significant funds raised from the auction of the permits.
To provide the best outcome for Australia, and to demonstrate the most effective ETS for the world, the Government must adhere to its goal of achieving emissions targets in the most efficient way. It matters not in this context whether profits are lost by large emissions intensive industrial companies or are gained by investors in innovative low emissions companies. In addition, a long term solution requires that threats to jobs in specific sectors or regions have no impact on the policy framework. These emotive arguments must be ignored for the greatest benefit to all.
This is an edited extract of an article written by John O'Brien. Full a copy of the full article please contact info@auscleantech.com.au
Emissions Trading - A Question of Courage
March 2008
Australia is poised to move from global laggard on climate change policy to trailblazer, setting the benchmark on emissions trading and innovative policy implementation. Australia’s unique position of inaction and isolation presents it with the opportunity to build the world’s best emissions trading scheme (ETS). The year ahead will determine whether it has the courage to deliver on this potential.
The introduction of an ETS will have a major impact on the Australian economy and there will be big winners and big losers. As a result intensive lobbying efforts will be made by all sides. The best outcome for the nation will be achieved if Rudd ignores the vested interests and listens only to the economists and the political strategists. Australia’s inaction to date presents an opportunity to use the experience gained elsewhere to design the world’s most effective ETS. By demonstrating an innovative and courageous system, the world will have a pilot scheme on which to base the emerging global system. Australia could perform a huge service to the world by focussing on the ideal system and ignoring purely local perspectives.
His current world trip is the perfect forum perfectly timed for Rudd to become the travelling salesman for an effective solution to climate change. Australia can lead the way for the world on how to best deal with emissions but needs the world’s support to overcome local resistance to structural change. He stands to gain the world’s support and a position of strength from Australia will benefit. Returning home a hero, he would be emboldened with the strength to resist those who wish to lead him from his path. The opportunity awaits.
Australia is poised to move from global laggard on climate change policy to trailblazer, setting the benchmark on emissions trading and innovative policy implementation. Australia’s unique position of inaction and isolation presents it with the opportunity to build the world’s best emissions trading scheme (ETS). The year ahead will determine whether it has the courage to deliver on this potential.
The introduction of an ETS will have a major impact on the Australian economy and there will be big winners and big losers. As a result intensive lobbying efforts will be made by all sides. The best outcome for the nation will be achieved if Rudd ignores the vested interests and listens only to the economists and the political strategists. Australia’s inaction to date presents an opportunity to use the experience gained elsewhere to design the world’s most effective ETS. By demonstrating an innovative and courageous system, the world will have a pilot scheme on which to base the emerging global system. Australia could perform a huge service to the world by focussing on the ideal system and ignoring purely local perspectives.
His current world trip is the perfect forum perfectly timed for Rudd to become the travelling salesman for an effective solution to climate change. Australia can lead the way for the world on how to best deal with emissions but needs the world’s support to overcome local resistance to structural change. He stands to gain the world’s support and a position of strength from Australia will benefit. Returning home a hero, he would be emboldened with the strength to resist those who wish to lead him from his path. The opportunity awaits.
An earlier version of this article was published in the London-based CARBONfirst journal that is published by IDEACarbon, a consultancy group co-founded by Sir Nicholas Stern.
This is an edited extract of an article written by John O'Brien. Full a copy of the full article please contact info@auscleantech.com.au
GPAus Windpower
April 2008
Creative Destruction
GPAus Windpower’s simple and wonderfully innovative business model allows local communities to invest in local wind farms and buy power from the same facility.
The business model involves the creative destruction of the downstream energy industry by allowing customers to become investors directly in generation assets. By rolling the model out in multiple countries, it has the potential to change the global energy industry.
One of the challenges with the concept is that it only requires a fairly modest corporate investment to get it started. Without the need for further investment and the consequent balance sheet benefits, listed energy companies find it difficult to get excited about the potential opportunities. Listed companies are also reluctant to dilute their equity and share ownership with communities in the way that this model envisages. In Australia, we have canvassed the major energy companies without success as it appears to not provide them with the right benefits and holds the threat of changing the dynamics of the whole industry and threatening entrenched strategies.
Engaging Millions of People
By enabling 1,000 community investors to ‘own’ each 2MW turbine, the community become part of the solution. Through the refinancing of each wind farm, the development of additional assets and the repetitive refinancing, the community engagement potential is huge.
In developing countries, the community investment model can be restructured and, in conjunction with micro-finance, can enable economic development for the bottom on the pyramid. We will have the answer to “ Its such a big problem, what can I do!”
For more information on this exciting project, contact Australian CleanTech
Creative Destruction
GPAus Windpower’s simple and wonderfully innovative business model allows local communities to invest in local wind farms and buy power from the same facility.
The business model involves the creative destruction of the downstream energy industry by allowing customers to become investors directly in generation assets. By rolling the model out in multiple countries, it has the potential to change the global energy industry.
One of the challenges with the concept is that it only requires a fairly modest corporate investment to get it started. Without the need for further investment and the consequent balance sheet benefits, listed energy companies find it difficult to get excited about the potential opportunities. Listed companies are also reluctant to dilute their equity and share ownership with communities in the way that this model envisages. In Australia, we have canvassed the major energy companies without success as it appears to not provide them with the right benefits and holds the threat of changing the dynamics of the whole industry and threatening entrenched strategies.
Engaging Millions of People
By enabling 1,000 community investors to ‘own’ each 2MW turbine, the community become part of the solution. Through the refinancing of each wind farm, the development of additional assets and the repetitive refinancing, the community engagement potential is huge.
In developing countries, the community investment model can be restructured and, in conjunction with micro-finance, can enable economic development for the bottom on the pyramid. We will have the answer to “ Its such a big problem, what can I do!”
For more information on this exciting project, contact Australian CleanTech
Launch of the Adelaide CleanTech Network
April 2008
The Adelaide Cleantech Network will establish South Australia as a leading national and international provider of Clean Technology services, products and innovation. The concept has been developed and will be launched by Australian CleanTech in association with industry and State Government partners. The Adelaide Cleantech Network will be officially launched at the Beyond Carbon 2008 Conference on 3 June 2008 in Adelaide.
The Value of a Cleantech Network
Whilst the concept of industry clustering is not new, one of the components that has often been missing is the active participation of financial institutions. Commonly, clusters have been formed to facilitate participants to grow through knowledge banks and knowledge transfer and enabling the opportunity to form bidding/buying groups. The inclusion of financial participants however creates additional opportunities to commercialise technologies and obtain funding for business growth. Through regular gatherings and communication, the Adelaide Cleantech Network will enable South Australia’s companies to keep ahead of the overall growth of the cleantech sector.
Investor Interest
The proposition to investors is highly attractive. The participating companies are all involved in high growth industries, have strong reputational capital and offer a positive outlook. The global industry growth is being driven not only by climate change concerns, but also by population growth and increasing wealth leading to both increased strain on environmental resources and an increased ability to pay for the solutions. Investor involvement will range from angel investors and venture capital companies that can provide early stage capital through to larger financial institutions able to fund major infrastructure projects. Additionally, more traditional debt and equity providers will provide advice and offer assistance to the industry participants.
Industry Participants
A diverse range of industry participants have expressed an interest in being involved in the Adelaide Cleantech Network. Industry associations for the water, waste management, environmental, renewable energy and remediation industries; Government departments covering recycling, natural resources and economic development; and University innovation and commercialisation departments.
In addition, the Adelaide Cleantech Network will provide connections to global cleantech investors and companies through a range of international affiliated organisations. This will present opportunities for both inbound and outbound cleantech investment.
To attend the launch of the Adelaide Cleantech Network book through CEDA at http://ceda.com.au/public/events/29100.html
The Value of a Cleantech Network
Whilst the concept of industry clustering is not new, one of the components that has often been missing is the active participation of financial institutions. Commonly, clusters have been formed to facilitate participants to grow through knowledge banks and knowledge transfer and enabling the opportunity to form bidding/buying groups. The inclusion of financial participants however creates additional opportunities to commercialise technologies and obtain funding for business growth. Through regular gatherings and communication, the Adelaide Cleantech Network will enable South Australia’s companies to keep ahead of the overall growth of the cleantech sector.
Investor Interest
The proposition to investors is highly attractive. The participating companies are all involved in high growth industries, have strong reputational capital and offer a positive outlook. The global industry growth is being driven not only by climate change concerns, but also by population growth and increasing wealth leading to both increased strain on environmental resources and an increased ability to pay for the solutions. Investor involvement will range from angel investors and venture capital companies that can provide early stage capital through to larger financial institutions able to fund major infrastructure projects. Additionally, more traditional debt and equity providers will provide advice and offer assistance to the industry participants.
Industry Participants
A diverse range of industry participants have expressed an interest in being involved in the Adelaide Cleantech Network. Industry associations for the water, waste management, environmental, renewable energy and remediation industries; Government departments covering recycling, natural resources and economic development; and University innovation and commercialisation departments.
In addition, the Adelaide Cleantech Network will provide connections to global cleantech investors and companies through a range of international affiliated organisations. This will present opportunities for both inbound and outbound cleantech investment.
To attend the launch of the Adelaide Cleantech Network book through CEDA at http://ceda.com.au/public/events/29100.html
Thursday, May 1, 2008
ACT Australian CleanTech Index
March 2008
The ACT Australian Cleantech Index provides a measure of the performance of the Australian listed stocks in the Cleantech sector. With over 70 companies following under the coverage of the index and with a combined market capitalisation of over $15Bn, the index presents for the first time a picture of the industry’s growth in a single measure.
The index is weighted by market capitalisation and is benchmarked against both the S&P/ASX200 and the S&P/ASX Small Ordinaries.
The rules for the formulation and management of the index have been developed with reference to global best practice.
Organisations interested in using the ACT Australian Cleantech Index should contact us for more information
11 March 2008 - ACT Australian Cleantech Index launch media release
2 April 2008 - 3Q08 Performance Report
1 May 2008 - April 2008 Performance Report.pdf
1 June 2008 - May 2008 Performance Report.pdf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
