Comments for What the Current Turmoil Means for CleanTech at http://www.ecogeek.org , comment 1 to 6 out of 6 comments http://www.ecogeek.org Fri, 06 Nov 2009 20:45:18 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.ecogeek.org/ecogeeks/2159#comment-19243 I see what you mean, and agree that overall investment across all companies decreases, but if people do turn to greener products, because they're more economical, then the rise in profits for greener product-companies should lead to more interest from investors. But I suppose that wouldn't be any help for startup companies, as they don't have any increasing profits to put the concerns of weary investors to rest. - Clinch Sun, 28 Sep 2008 12:37:26 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/ecogeeks/2159#comment-19241 In response to the first commenter, who sees a silver lining in this. I'd like to agree with you, but I can't. Here's why. While green solutions often provide a decent ROI, the initial cost is often too great. During a downturn in the economy, it makes much less sense to invest in a large project. Newer companies just starting out have a similar issue. With less available investment capital, they'll be looking to spread their costs over the long term, which means huge upfront "greening" costs will be out. - dOgBOi Sun, 28 Sep 2008 12:21:14 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/ecogeeks/2159#comment-19230 Thanks for the plug, Hank. I agree that the current climate is not the best for cleantech, but overall, I think it's a good thing. Our first priority in tackling climate change should be energy efficiency, and this is something that tight financial times encourage. True, many exciting new technologies will be delayed or abandoned for lack of funding, but we already have the technology we need to decarbonize the economy. What we need is political will; getting rid of carbon is a lot cheaper than securing our oil supplies in Iraq, and the only way to get political will is a good crisis. This financial meltdown has been inevitable ever since 2001, when the dot-com meltdown did not run it's full course due to the Fed pumping money into the system, replacing the dot-com bubble with the housing bubble. This crisis is likely to be a bad one, but there will still be enough money to tackle climate change. Tackling climate change is cheap... (compared to all our other problems) Finding the will to do so--- requires a crisis. On stocks, it's back to the basics- energy efficiency rather than solar backpacks. It's less exciting, but it will do more good for the environment at less cost. - Tom Konrad Sat, 27 Sep 2008 19:18:00 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/ecogeeks/2159#comment-19226 I just wanted to say I thought this was a great post. I've been doing a bit of research myself the last few days on the same topic and thought you really nailed. The little guys are going to get hammered first, and right now what we need are more start-up cleantech firms. They are popping up fast (I've seen many colleagues and friends leave tenured positions to pursue them), but unless they really take hold, can obtain funding, and start producing new products and competing in the same manner as software start-ups we are going to slide even further behind than we already are. And, as you noted, as inhabitants of this planet we cannot afford to see this happen. http://thegreentechnocrat.com/ - August Flanagan Sat, 27 Sep 2008 11:05:28 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/ecogeeks/2159#comment-19225 Err ... The horse left some time ago ... with all the money. Sorry don't know what else to say. It wasn't real money though. Just money someone invented lent to us and then cheated it back off us. - Morgan Sachs Sat, 27 Sep 2008 11:01:32 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/ecogeeks/2159#comment-19220 Perhaps I'm being too optimistic, but I think there could be a silver lining to this. Just like how the rise in car-fuel has made people think about their spending, and has been a factor in some people buying more efficient (i.e. greener) cars, driving less, and/or using public transport/cycling instead. Increase costs (of everything) may cause people to be more aware of the long term savings on more efficient products and such. - Clinch Sat, 27 Sep 2008 09:19:50 +0100