| Erin: Welcome to T2A and our discussion about continued international focus on the issue of global warming and the new thinking about how to contain it. VOA talked with noted journalist and author Tom Friedman about his plan to have the United States lead the next great effort to bring what he says is a largely man-made phenomenon under control. His Code Green strategy is aimed at taming what he calls a hot, flat crowded planet. Erin: With the global economy the way it is, isn’t it expensive to take the steps that you outline and aren’t governments – especially the U.S. government – too concerned about immediate needs like this economic crisis, about whether the way they meet desired ends are environmentally friendly or not?
Tom:I look at it totally differently.I believe the world is getting hot, flat, and crowded. It’s getting hot with global warming, flat, which is the rise of middle classes all over the world who are consuming like Americans, consuming oil, food, energy at American levels. And it’s getting crowded—population growth. In a world that’s getting hot, flat, and crowded, I know one thing. The next great global industry is going to have to be ET—Energy Technology that can allow a world with so many Americans—so many people living an American lifestyle—to grow in a sustainable way. And so, to me it’s not a question of cost, or what not, it’s a question of what’s going to be the next great global industry? ET, Energy Technology. Which country’s going to own that industry? I want it to be my country. Why? Because the country that owns ET is going to have the most economic security, the most energy security, the most national security, the highest standard of living, the most competitive and innovative industries. And you know what? Also the most global respect. Because whoever’s solving the world’s biggest problem—ET—is going to have the most global respect. How can we afford not to do that?
------------------------------- Erin: Based on the current standing of the United States in the world right now, is it well positioned to take the lead in developing that Energy Technology? Do you see hopeful prospects for that, or do you see someone else taking that lead right now?
Tom: Right now, nobody has all the assets that we have. I’m a big believer that the American marketplace is the best innovation engine the good Lord ever created. The combination of research universities, national laboratories, venture capitalists, and markets is the greatest ecosystem for innovation in the world today. Nothing can rival it. But you know what? If we don’t shape that ecosystem the right way, if we don’t incentivize the players to produce ET, energy technologies, then they don’t do it. And then secondary or less-good ones will take the lead. And the ones that are just a notch below us are very, very good. In fact some of them are already producing things that are better. And I’m talking about Japan, I’m talking about Western Europe, soon China, India. We don’t own this, and if we don’t own it we’re not going to be big, because it’s hard to be a big country unless you’re big in big things. And there’s going to be nothing bigger than ET.
------------------------------- Erin: An example of an incentive, then, that would drive?
Tom: Well the incentive you need is you’ve got to shape the market. How do we shape the markets? Markets are shaped with prices, standards, and regulations. You need a carbon tax, you need a gasoline tax, or at least you need a floor price. Let’s just tell everybody. Look, when gasoline hit four fifty a gallon, what happened, people’s behavior changed. Right here in Washington, D.C., one hundred thousand more people a day rode the subway here. All the Hummers and big cars in the lot just stand there and rot. Ok we’re not going to get a gasoline tax today, then at least have a floor? Let’s tell customers and innovators, “Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, the price of gasoline is never going to fall below four dollars a gallon. So don’t worry if you want to innovate things that are going to be a little more expensive, you will be competitive.” That’s how you do it.
------------------------------- Erin: So as we speak now, the price of oil is high—good for ET?
Tom: Good for ET. Keep it up there, baby. You know, I look at Iran, saying one hundred and fifty dollars a barrel, I see Ahmadinedjad, I say “You go girl, you are my friend.”
------------------------------- Erin: Is there reason for optimism that we are indeed on the verge of starting a revolution and starting to lead one? And what, if anything, are we currently doing right, as far as setting us on the path to making the necessary changes to the way we address environmental issues?
Tom: Well the reason for optimism is, I travel all around this country on this book tour. Everywhere I go I come up from every trip and I’ve got a handful of business cards from innovators. “Oh Mr. Friedman, I got a duck who paddles a wheel, blows up a balloon, issues methane, turns a turban, generates electricity…” I hear the craziest stuff—there’s amazing stuff going on out there. It’s all exploding from the bottom up. But you need the government to shape it and incentivize it in the right way. If I were to draw a picture of America today it would be this space shuttle taking off. All this thrust coming from below. But the booster rocket—Washington, D.C.—is cracked and leaking energy. And the pilots in the cockpit are fighting over the flight plan. So we can’t achieve a skate velocity to get to the next orbit, which is the ET Revolution. That’s the problem right now.
------------------------------- Erin: If we tax companies that provide unclean sources of energy, for example, will make it more difficult for those companies to operate, won’t there be a slump for the workers of those companies while innovation catches up catches up to regulation? In other words, will this effort to tax dirty fuel have an initially harmful effect on jobs?
Tom: Oh, I’m sure. Let’s take Denmark, that’s a good example. Little country, five million people. Gasoline there is ten dollars a gallon. Because there’s basically a five dollar gallon tax. They have a CO2 tax there. If you get your electric bill in Denmark, little line that says CO2 tax. On top of the CO2 tax, unemployment in Denmark, 1.6 percent. You want to buy a wind turban? I hope you speak Danish, because one out of every three wind turbans in the world come from Denmark. The top two enzymatic companies for cellolosic ethanol—Denmark. Last year Denmark’s exports in ET—energy technology, clean power systems—over ten billion dollars. It’s one of their biggest export industries? Guess what? There is a transition cost, but if you keep postponing the transition, somebody else will make it. And so yes, there’s going to be winners and losers. That’s why I say, people say we’re having a Green Revolution, and I say, “Really? A Green Revolution? Have you ever been to a revolution where no one got hurt?” If that’s the Green Revolution, that’s not a revolution, that’s a party. You’ll know it’s a revolution when people either have to change or die. Not change your brand or die, not give me a green racing stripe, not give me green stationery instead of white stationery. When you have to change or die. That’s what the IT Revolution was about. Why would anybody expect that this would be any different?
------------------------------- Erin: So how closely would the current or the next administration be looking at a country like Denmark as an example or as a place for ideas?
Tom: Well, they should be looking at it very closely. Let’s look at the people who are taking the lead in this new industry. They’re called Japan, Western Europe, countries like Denmark. We should be studying what they did how they did it, coming to our people, having an honest conversation with the American people. And saying that this is how we launch the next great revolution. Not by telling them to “Drill, baby, drill!”. That’s making people stupid, that’s just stupid. Our motto should be, “invent, baby, invent.” Asking people to “drill, baby, drill” on the eve of the ET Revolution is like telling people on the eve of the IT Revolution-- the birth of PC’s and the internet—that we want more IBM typewriters.
------------------------------- Erin: What needs to happen in order to rally public support? You talk about people wanting to be green when it’s easy, how can we support a plan whose benefits may not be immediate?
Tom: Well, my motto is very simple. Change your leaders, not your light bulbs. Because leaders inspire people, leaders write the rules, and rules shape markets, markets give you scale. It’s a leadership question. People have to understand the danger, but also the incredible opportunity that’s out there. Change your leaders, not your light bulbs.
------------------------------- Erin: Who do you see providing that leadership?
Tom: Nobody. Next question!
------------------------------- Erin: Right now, we’re learning some strategies from the Earthwatch Institute and CEO Ed Wilson. Our first question comes from Ethiopia: Wondwossen, Ethiopia (email): We know from history there have been more serious environmental challenges to the planet and we now also face some new challenges which don't seem to be made by man. Tell us your thoughts.
Ed: The world has always faced both man made and environmental challenges. What makes the current situation more serious is that the world is a much more complex place than ever before, with rapid growth of populations and the declining natural resources, with issues of water and food scarcity and with growing industrialization. It just means that in some ways we're in a more fragile state and so when we do see change on a global scale, it's more likely to impact a greater number of people and also likely to be more apparent and also accelerated, such as is the case with climate change because of our actions. The easiest way to answer is yes, we've always had natural change, but I think we're more vulnerable to that change in this modern age than we were before.Also the repercussions are far greater than they've been before.
-------------------------------
|
