\non carbon and wants it now—both for lofty reasons like combating global
\nwarming, but also because it could be good for business. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
As the Senate inches
\ncloser to climate legislation that could give the Internet giant what it wants,
\nI checked in with Dan Reicher, the director of climate change and energy
\ninitiatives at Google to see what surfing the web had to do with reining in greenhouse
\ngases. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Turns out, the
\nanswer is technology. Reicher—a former
\nDepartment of Energy assistant secretary who now directs Google’s investments
\nin clean energy—believes that exposing the hidden costs of dirty fuels will set off
\na rush of investment in new energy innovations.
\nHe says carbon pricing is an “essential signal we have to get to.” Right now, “money is sitting there to make
\nsignificant investments,” he says, but the cash flow is sidelined because the
\nincentives aren’t there. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Once they have to
\npay the true price of carbon combustion, the calculus for companies would
\nchange, making it fiscally prudent for them to conserve and make cleaner energy. All of a sudden it would make sense to invest
\nin figuring out how to consume less power, or in new technologies that cut
\nemissions at the source. And that would
\nmean a huge new market for innovations that would help them do that. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The same would go
\nfor individuals—under carbon pricing, households save if they reduce their
\nelectricity loads, and we’d expect a spike in demand for cheap energy
\nefficiency technology as folks seek to reduce their monthly bills. Reicher gives us a compelling vision full of
\nsmart grids that know when your fridge needs to defrost and when your car’s
\nbattery can turn you a profit by selling spare juice. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Google is
\nparticularly interested in this low hanging fruit of energy efficiency which
\nReicher says “grows back” as we switch from incandescent to compact
\nfluorescents and now to LED. At each
\nstep we save more energy and promote more innovation, making the area
\nparticularly ripe for investment dollars.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Google is thinking
\nabout the big global picture. Reicher
\ntold me that, “in general terms, a carbon price will do a lot to advance the
\ncompetitiveness of these technologies that offer serious climate reductions,
\nhelp for our energy security, increase our domestic fuels, and can create all
\nsorts of jobs.” <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
But the search-engine-plus
\nis also thinking about its own bottom line. It’s already got products on the market that help consumers save
\nelectricity. The Google Power Meter
\nhelps you monitor and reduce down your BTUs online-showing you the cheapest and
\neasiest ways you can cut back on juice. For
\nexample, your toaster might be sucking up $8 worth of power per year when it’s
\nnot even in use. If it is, Google will
\nlet you know so you can unplug it. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
As Reicher puts it,
\n“putting
\na serious price of carbon will both get us closer to the serious energy
\nreductions we need to make but also accelerate the domestic development and
\nadoption of these technologies.” It’s
\nthat last part that’s good for business.
\nWhen government holds up its side of the “triangle of technology,
\npolicy, and finance” that Reicher says is essential for green development, it
\nspurs the private investment and innovation that keeps businesses strong. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
That’s where
\nCongress comes in. The most important
\npolicy is carbon pricing. That’s what
\nwill change the economic fundamentals, augmented by other programs—like energy
\nefficiency standards and government revolving loans to bring new ideas to the market. The
\ntechnology and finance sides are ready and able; but we’ve been waiting for too
\nlong for the policy piece that can complete the puzzle. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Google hopes the Senate will act quickly to jumpstart
\nwhat it thinks will be an economic bright spot in the current downturn. Reicher doesn’t really care how it’s
\ndone, saying there are “various ways to get to a carbon price.” Whatever packaging it comes in, a price on
\ncarbon will ultimately be good for that company and many others.<\/p>\n
Related Links:<\/strong><\/p>\n Pollution limits are essential for clean energy investments<\/a><\/p>\n Kerry-vs.-Bingaman power struggle lurks beneath ‘what next?’ question in Senate<\/a><\/p>\n