In yet another example of turning a problem into an opportunity, developers in New Jersey have used fallow land to install a large solar farm on Rutger's Livingston campus. To date, the solar farm has reduced the university's electricity bill by $235,000 and, better yet, earned it $1.4 million in clean energy credits.
Related Post
I'm in Eugene, Oregon today to give the keynote presentation at the conference celebrating the 100th anniversary of the Eugene Water and Electricity Board. The gist of my message is that as impressive as progress has been in the past century it will pale in comparison to what is coming in the next two decades.
One of the big challenges facing the utility industry is the idea that they will need to unlearn their ideas of what the utility grid of the future looks like as well as the role their customers will play in the creation of energy in the near future.
To this end, take a look at the image above. It is the "microgrid dream house." This vision hasn't yet been achieved but if you study emerging technologies as I do, it is clear solar cells, micro wind turbines, fuel cells, insulation, batteries and smart meters are all going to continue to improve.
Personally, I believe they are going to continue to improve to the point where many people will opt to disconnect from the grid because they can safely, cheaply and sustainably produce and store their own electricity.
"Clearly there is a lot going on deep in the Earth that is completely unknown to science." So concludes this fascinating article in The Economist on, of all things, carbon.
Did you know, for example, that although carbon is critical to life on earth the scientific community has no idea of how much of the stuff actually exists on Earth? Ranges estimate anywhere from between 0.07% to 3.2% of the planet. That's a huge discrepancy for such a vital element.
I was also surprised to learn that while I had grown up believing oil and natural gas are formed near the Earth's surface from the fossilized bodies of living organisms, some Russian scientists believe petroleum is "abiogenic" and that the Earth's temperature and pressure convert carbonates and water into hydrocarbons. I don't know enough to render an opinion on this topic but I do believe in remaining intellectually humble and staying open to new possibilities; and, if the Russian scientists are correct, oil and gas could be much more prevelant than we had previously believed.
Lastly, I was surprised to discover still other scientists estimate that up to half of all living matter on Earth may resides at depths of 5KM below the surface. If true, that's a whole lot of life about which most of us are completely unaware. (It is also yet another item that I need to add to my notebook of things I don't know.)
It is also a fitting metaphor for unlearning -- There will always be so much more that we don't know than what we do know. This simple fact should remind us that we must always be open to -- and prepared for -- unlearning.
Interested in a little unlearning quiz about carbon? Check out this old post:
Perhaps you'd like to see another visual metaphor for unlearning? Try this old post:
It was the biggest story of the year and perhaps the biggest story of the decade or maybe even this century. Surprisingly, it has quickly faded from the view of most people.
What story am I referring to? It's not the BP oil spill. It was the announcement in mid-May that man had created artificial life. (For a quicker primer on the topic I encourage you to read this excellent article in the Economist -- which to its credit is the only major publication I am aware of that accorded the story front cover status).
I mention this because unlearning requires you to see what isn't there. In the case of artificial life just because the main stream media isn't covering the field that doesn't mean it isn't going to have a huge impact on you or your business. It is. And if you are in the health care, agriculture, chemical or energy industries, I believe it is going to require a massive amount of unlearning much sooner than most people realize.
As The Economist wrote, the creation of artificial life could "prove mankind's mastery over nature in a way more profound than even the detonation of the first atomic bomb."
I am preparing to speak to a major public power association early next week on the impact of disruptive technologies. Among other things, I will be discussing breakthroughs in solar, wind, biofuels, wave power, energy demand managment, and fuel cell technology. I will also being mentioning possible breakthroughs in the field of “cold fusion.”
The field has been held in very low regard since 1989 when other scientists could not reproduce the results of Martin Fleishmann and Stanley Pons. Humiliated by the scientific establishment, Fleishmann and Pons were forced to close their labs, flee the country and, basically, drop out of sight.
This was unfortunate because it highlights a behavior many of us must unlearn: Proving another person wrong does not prove us right. To wit, just because Fleishmann and Pons were not successful in achieving nuclear fusion at room temperature does not mean that it can’t or won’t be done sometime in the future.
Today, scores of researchers have now picked up the mantle of Fleishmann and Pons and are working on cold fusion. I don’t know enough about the field to say with any certainty if they will be successful but I’d remind skeptics that someone else’s wrong doesn’t necessarily make you right.
Big problems such as health care, feeding the world and addressing climate change don't necessarily require big solutions. In the 19th century, Ignaz Semmelweis helped save the lives of hundreds of thousands of women by getting doctors to wash their hands prior to assisting in the delivery of a new-born child. (Unfortunately, however, it still required the medical community nearly two decades to unlearn their stubborn and unhealthy habits.)
Alas, in the 21st century, the number of infections in hospitals remains unacceptably high. Why? Many healthcare professionals still aren't employing good hygiene. If they were better at the simple act of washing their hands, the results would be impressive -- on the order of saving thousands of lives annually and preventing billions of dollars in unnecessary costs.
In the field of agriculture, it was the addition of ammonium nitrate -- a cheap but effective crop fertilizer -- which allowed the world's farmers to feed billions more people with the same land.
Continued advances in the field of genomics may also continue to increase the yield of corn, wheat and rice by making these crops more efficient in terms of how they utilize water and fertilizer. The result: More people can be fed using the same amount of land but with less impact on the environment.
In the automotive industry, it was the installation of the seat belt that saved the lives of thousands of motorists -- even though the device was at first ridiculed as "inconvenient, costly, and just a bunch of damn nonsense" by auto executives. The next life-saving advance could be the introduction of super-strong, super-light nanomaterials.
As strange as it may sound, the problem of hurricanes may also just need a simple fix. As Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner outline in their delightful new book, Super Freakonomics, in may be possible to prevent costly hurricanes (which, since 2005, have inflicted an estimated $153 billion in damage to the United States alone) by deploying a few thousand "hydraulic heads" in those areas where hurricanes start. The devices work by bringing cooler water from the bottom of the ocean to the top thus cooling the surface temperature of the ocean water and preventing hurricanes from forming in the first place. The estimated cost: $1 billion.
On the bigger problem of climate change, Levitt and Dubner also outline the logic behind "Budyko's Blanket" -- a super high hose which would spew sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere -- which could theoretically cool the planet for a mere $250 million.
Now, to be fair, both the "hydraulic heads" and "Budyko Blanket" may not work and serious questions remain on both ideas. But the broader point is that when faced with big problems there is absolutely no reason why we must first look to "big answers" as the solution. Often, big problems can be solved with small solutions. After all, as a child, how many of your cuts and bruises were solved with a tender kiss from your mother?
In my 2008 book, Jump the Curve: 50 Essential Strategies to Help Your Company Stay Ahead of Emerging Technologies, one strategy I encourage people to employ from time to time is that of reading the newspaper backwards. Why? Because it can help you more clearly see where the future is headed. This, in turn, will reinforce why unlearning is so important to your survival.
Yesterday, for example, as I was returning from Dallas where I delivered a keynote presentation on the future of travel and tourism to the Texas Travel Industry Association, I began by reading the marketing section of the Wall Street Journal from back-to-front. Here’s what I noticed. On Page 8, it was revealed that Sarah Palin’s new book won’t be released in an E-book until after Christmas. This is noteworthy for the simple fact that it wouldn’t have been noteworthy as recently as last year. In other words, E-books have now become so popular that when a new book isn’t released in electronic format at the same time as the print version it qualifies as news. It’s clear from this development that e-book sales will only continue to rise at the expense of traditional hardcover books and that the publishing industry must unlearn some of its current assumptions.
On Page B7 there was a similar story, only this one related to the advertising industry: Web Ad Sales in Britain Overtake TV. On Page B6, it was announced that Lemmis Lighting is releasing a 20-year lightbulb. (Imagine this: In the future your kid or grandchild might not be able to change a lightbulb because it is something they only have to do once every two decades!) The broader implication is that both marketers and professionals in the lighting business will soon need to unlearn how they do business.
And then on Page B5 there were two articles of note. First, there was a small article announcing that Princeton University was testing Amazon Kindle’s DX e-book as part of a national pilot program; and, second, there was a larger article explaining that the airline industry is finally getting serious about employing RFID tags to track baggage. Both news stories reinforce the growing prevalence of e-books and RFID technology.
My friends, the future is here. To learn more about it all you need to do is read the back of the newspaper! If you do, I think you'll better understand why we must all continue to unlearn.
P.S. If you keep reading the 9/30/09 edition of the WSJ, on Page 3, there is article explaining why biobutanol might soon replace ethanol as America’s biofuel of choice. (It'd be wonderful if Congress could unlearn its infatuation with ethanol.)
Related Posts by America’s Chief Unlearning Officer, Jack Uldrich
A Future of Black Swans
The Future Requires Unlearning
Sur-Prize: The Future Can Be 10% Better
