The Launch of the Sydney Cleantech Network will be held on Tuesday 22 September 2009 from 5:30pm until 7:00pm at the offices of KPMG
at Level 15, 10 Shelley Street, Sydney (entry also via 7 Sussex St)
The evening will include:
- the formal launch and a presentation on the progress of the cleantech sector in NSW by the Hon Carmel Tebbutt, NSW Deputy Premier and Minister for Climate Change and the Environment.
- two minute pitches from companies seeking finance or partners
Further information is available at the Sydney Cleantech Network group on Linked-in at http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1928638&trk=hb_side_g
To be added to the distribution list for future events please email scn@auscleantech.com.au
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Monday, August 24, 2009
Adelaide CleanTech Network drinks - Tuesday 4 August 2009
5:30 until 7:00pm
at the Thomson Playford Cutlers’ offices at
Level 7, 19 Gouger Street, Adelaide
To be added to the distribution list for future events please email acn@auscleantech.com.au
The August 2009 event included:
- a short presentation on the how the Australian Institute of Commercialisation and the Clean Energy Innovation Centre can help South Australian cleantech companies
- 2 minute pitches from four growth companies looking for investors, partners or just wanting to announce company developments. The companies that pitched at this event were:
- WattWatchers - energy and emissions home monitoring system - www.wattwatchers.com.au
- Lumenite - luminscent lighting equipment - www.lwp-lumenite.com
- COPROH - large scale biosequestration and land rehabilitation
- Cogen Microsystems - small scale distributed solar/gas hybrid cogenration systems - www.cogenmicro.com
The following companies have pitched at previous Adelaide Cleantech Network events:
- Flinders University Materials & BioEnergy Group - Nanomaterials for Stormwater harvesting
- CleanFutures - biosensors for Nitrates, Phosphates and Sulfites - www.cleanfutures.com.au
- Acquasol Infrastructure Ltd - large scale solar thermal/gas hybrid power and water generation project - www.acquasol.com.au
- Open Energy - demand management systems - www.openenergy.com.au
- Seadov - second generation wind turbines - www.seadov.com
at the Thomson Playford Cutlers’ offices at
Level 7, 19 Gouger Street, Adelaide
To be added to the distribution list for future events please email acn@auscleantech.com.au
The August 2009 event included:
- a short presentation on the how the Australian Institute of Commercialisation and the Clean Energy Innovation Centre can help South Australian cleantech companies
- 2 minute pitches from four growth companies looking for investors, partners or just wanting to announce company developments. The companies that pitched at this event were:
- WattWatchers - energy and emissions home monitoring system - www.wattwatchers.com.au
- Lumenite - luminscent lighting equipment - www.lwp-lumenite.com
- COPROH - large scale biosequestration and land rehabilitation
- Cogen Microsystems - small scale distributed solar/gas hybrid cogenration systems - www.cogenmicro.com
The following companies have pitched at previous Adelaide Cleantech Network events:
- Flinders University Materials & BioEnergy Group - Nanomaterials for Stormwater harvesting
- CleanFutures - biosensors for Nitrates, Phosphates and Sulfites - www.cleanfutures.com.au
- Acquasol Infrastructure Ltd - large scale solar thermal/gas hybrid power and water generation project - www.acquasol.com.au
- Open Energy - demand management systems - www.openenergy.com.au
- Seadov - second generation wind turbines - www.seadov.com
Monday, August 3, 2009
Green Benefits for all Business
Many businesses might assume that sustainability, emissions and cleantech are issues for only big corporates and that they do not have time to worry about these ‘nice-to-haves’. Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) are usually so focussed on ensuring sales, keeping costs down and chasing cash flows that, regardless of personal persuasions, keeping the company afloat rates a long way above saving the environment.
These views are exasperated by two types of media coverage of climate change: the no-hope horror stories inciting paralysing terror; and the ‘happy ever after thanks to science’ approach offering an effortless solution.
The continual coverage of melting ice sheets, sea level rises, droughts, severe storms and crop failures is essential in providing a context for debate on climate change. However, the tone is often so cataclysmic, so intent on relishing predictions of upcoming disasters, that many people are left with the defeatist attitude ‘We have passed the tipping point rendering all action pointless’.
Stories of wonderful ‘silver bullet’ inventions that will ‘solve’ the climate change problem are equally as damaging. Tales of genetically modified carbon-munching trees, or dumping iron filings into the ocean allow the listeners to relax and dismiss cautionary news. To those accepting such stories, the problem appears insignificant in the face of man’s scientific innovation.
However, if done well, ‘green’ activities can save money and increase sales for all companies. It does not need to be an extra task needing more management time but rather an excuse to review the business plan and position the company ahead of its competitors and ready for future growth.
There are many people offering to do ‘emissions audits’ and to provide carbon offsets, and these have their place. Much greater value can be secured however by a business assessing its strategies before adopting the quick fix (and extra costs) of carbon offsets. There are two key aspects of a business, whether it produces goods or services, that will drive the greatest increase in the bottom line.
Firstly, how can processes be changed to reduce waste and therefore increase efficiency? The waste may be measured in terms of input materials, consumables, utilities (power and water) and even human resources. The solutions might involve installing new equipment, streamlining approvals processes or recycling waste back into the start of the process. For all the inputs and outputs of a business, whatever it may produce, a balance can be drawn up to show what creates value and what creates waste. Waste streams can then either be reduced or beneficially used.
Waste is just a resource to which insufficient imagination has been applied. Once the waste streams are understood then some imagination and innovation can be applied to utilise and create value from some of these resources. These solutions often need external technical and business process advice to overcome the problem of managers ‘not knowing what they don’t know’.
Secondly, business must look outwards to see what changes are occurring to their business environment. Most importantly, an understanding of how its clients’ needs are changing. Large corporates are starting to look at the supply chain emissions of multiple inputs, Governments want to be seen to be procuring sustainably, hotels are assessing the environmental footprint of their menus and householders are increasingly buying ‘green’. If a company does not anticipate these changes, it will lose market share. If it continues to ignore them, it will go broke. By moving early, however, it is possible to gain customers and move ahead of competitors.
Over time, sustainability and climate change will change every aspect of how our communities work. This change presents huge opportunities for those willing to grab them. Opportunities to both improve their internal processes and to anticipate the changing needs of their customers. Those that do not evolve and are focussed only on the problems will find themselves left well behind. Which will you choose to be?
Australian CleanTech works with businesses to help them understand their efficiencies and the changing supply chain environment.
These views are exasperated by two types of media coverage of climate change: the no-hope horror stories inciting paralysing terror; and the ‘happy ever after thanks to science’ approach offering an effortless solution.
The continual coverage of melting ice sheets, sea level rises, droughts, severe storms and crop failures is essential in providing a context for debate on climate change. However, the tone is often so cataclysmic, so intent on relishing predictions of upcoming disasters, that many people are left with the defeatist attitude ‘We have passed the tipping point rendering all action pointless’.
Stories of wonderful ‘silver bullet’ inventions that will ‘solve’ the climate change problem are equally as damaging. Tales of genetically modified carbon-munching trees, or dumping iron filings into the ocean allow the listeners to relax and dismiss cautionary news. To those accepting such stories, the problem appears insignificant in the face of man’s scientific innovation.
However, if done well, ‘green’ activities can save money and increase sales for all companies. It does not need to be an extra task needing more management time but rather an excuse to review the business plan and position the company ahead of its competitors and ready for future growth.
There are many people offering to do ‘emissions audits’ and to provide carbon offsets, and these have their place. Much greater value can be secured however by a business assessing its strategies before adopting the quick fix (and extra costs) of carbon offsets. There are two key aspects of a business, whether it produces goods or services, that will drive the greatest increase in the bottom line.
Firstly, how can processes be changed to reduce waste and therefore increase efficiency? The waste may be measured in terms of input materials, consumables, utilities (power and water) and even human resources. The solutions might involve installing new equipment, streamlining approvals processes or recycling waste back into the start of the process. For all the inputs and outputs of a business, whatever it may produce, a balance can be drawn up to show what creates value and what creates waste. Waste streams can then either be reduced or beneficially used.
Waste is just a resource to which insufficient imagination has been applied. Once the waste streams are understood then some imagination and innovation can be applied to utilise and create value from some of these resources. These solutions often need external technical and business process advice to overcome the problem of managers ‘not knowing what they don’t know’.
Secondly, business must look outwards to see what changes are occurring to their business environment. Most importantly, an understanding of how its clients’ needs are changing. Large corporates are starting to look at the supply chain emissions of multiple inputs, Governments want to be seen to be procuring sustainably, hotels are assessing the environmental footprint of their menus and householders are increasingly buying ‘green’. If a company does not anticipate these changes, it will lose market share. If it continues to ignore them, it will go broke. By moving early, however, it is possible to gain customers and move ahead of competitors.
Over time, sustainability and climate change will change every aspect of how our communities work. This change presents huge opportunities for those willing to grab them. Opportunities to both improve their internal processes and to anticipate the changing needs of their customers. Those that do not evolve and are focussed only on the problems will find themselves left well behind. Which will you choose to be?
Australian CleanTech works with businesses to help them understand their efficiencies and the changing supply chain environment.
Open Letter to Senator Fielding
13 July 2009
Dear Senator
As you would know, the news today widely reported that you have been unable to find coherent answers to your reasonable queries on climate change and have raised this issue with your fellow parliamentarians.
I am by no means a climate scientist, but I have heard some reasonably compelling answers to the points that you have raised. In Australia, Professor Barry Brook at the University of Adelaide is able to provide detailed explanations that may help arrest your concerns. I will be seeing Barry tomorrow and will let him know that you may be in contact.
Through contacts in the US and in Europe, I can also connect you with other leading global climate scientists who will be able to provide you with as much detail as you wish to see. There is of course no absolutes, no absolute proof – science as you know is merely a question of fitting the most likely cause with the most obvious consequence. The evidence appears however to be reasonably conclusive on many of the key points.
I would agree with you that science is not perfect. This is continually demonstrated in scientific fields such as medicine, but we continue to take treatments even when the diagnosis is not perfect. Like the human body, there is undoubtedly far more to learn and far greater understanding of our climate to be gained.
Some might consider the fact that the vast majority of global climate scientists agree in overview (if not in detail) to be merely a conspiracy of self-reinforcement amongst all those ‘white coats’. Others might consider that in fact the weight of probability appears to be strongly in favour of anthropogenic climate change caused by emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.
In the unlikely event that all the leading scientists have got it wrong, there is an interesting consideration that I first heard raised by Professor Stephen Schneider of Stanford University. He asked a public meeting in Adelaide Town Hall how many in the audience had house insurance, to which many hands were raised. He then asked how many people have had their house burn down, to which one poor chap at the back raised his hand. To many who have thought seriously about the issue, the insurance of reducing carbon emissions appears to be a sensible precaution just in case the world’s climate scientists happen to be correct.
If you are right, then I will happily applaud you once the scientists are standing with you. That you may be wrong and, through your actions, may even manage to turn global opinion against the climate science community, worries me immensely. I wish to invest in climate insurance for my family.
If there is a hint of uncertainty, then taking the safe route through backing the majority of climate scientists appears to be the only rationale course of action.
Please let me know if you would like to be introduced to any particular climate scientists – I would be more than happy to facilitate this through my contacts.
I apologise for making this an open letter with the media, but it is an issue that is too important to remain in private.
Best regards
John
Dear Senator
As you would know, the news today widely reported that you have been unable to find coherent answers to your reasonable queries on climate change and have raised this issue with your fellow parliamentarians.
I am by no means a climate scientist, but I have heard some reasonably compelling answers to the points that you have raised. In Australia, Professor Barry Brook at the University of Adelaide is able to provide detailed explanations that may help arrest your concerns. I will be seeing Barry tomorrow and will let him know that you may be in contact.
Through contacts in the US and in Europe, I can also connect you with other leading global climate scientists who will be able to provide you with as much detail as you wish to see. There is of course no absolutes, no absolute proof – science as you know is merely a question of fitting the most likely cause with the most obvious consequence. The evidence appears however to be reasonably conclusive on many of the key points.
I would agree with you that science is not perfect. This is continually demonstrated in scientific fields such as medicine, but we continue to take treatments even when the diagnosis is not perfect. Like the human body, there is undoubtedly far more to learn and far greater understanding of our climate to be gained.
Some might consider the fact that the vast majority of global climate scientists agree in overview (if not in detail) to be merely a conspiracy of self-reinforcement amongst all those ‘white coats’. Others might consider that in fact the weight of probability appears to be strongly in favour of anthropogenic climate change caused by emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.
In the unlikely event that all the leading scientists have got it wrong, there is an interesting consideration that I first heard raised by Professor Stephen Schneider of Stanford University. He asked a public meeting in Adelaide Town Hall how many in the audience had house insurance, to which many hands were raised. He then asked how many people have had their house burn down, to which one poor chap at the back raised his hand. To many who have thought seriously about the issue, the insurance of reducing carbon emissions appears to be a sensible precaution just in case the world’s climate scientists happen to be correct.
If you are right, then I will happily applaud you once the scientists are standing with you. That you may be wrong and, through your actions, may even manage to turn global opinion against the climate science community, worries me immensely. I wish to invest in climate insurance for my family.
If there is a hint of uncertainty, then taking the safe route through backing the majority of climate scientists appears to be the only rationale course of action.
Please let me know if you would like to be introduced to any particular climate scientists – I would be more than happy to facilitate this through my contacts.
I apologise for making this an open letter with the media, but it is an issue that is too important to remain in private.
Best regards
John
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
