Comments on: Directing Clean-Energy Investment in Massachusetts: An Xconomy Debate http://www.xconomy.com/boston/2007/08/13/directing-clean-energy-investment-in-massachusetts-an-xconomy-debate/ Business + Technology in the Exponential Economy Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:30:41 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Cleantech Investing » Blog Archive » AltaRock and other news http://www.xconomy.com/boston/2007/08/13/directing-clean-energy-investment-in-massachusetts-an-xconomy-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-767 Cleantech Investing » Blog Archive » AltaRock and other news Tue, 04 Sep 2007 16:27:54 +0000 http://www.xconomy.com/2007/08/13/directing-clean-energy-investment-in-massachusetts-an-xconomy-debate/#comment-767 [...] energy techs (hat tip to Eric “Enrico” Engstrom for the heads up on this one)… More follow-up on the Massachusetts cleantech cluster… Joel has an interesting column on the information [...] [...] energy techs (hat tip to Eric “Enrico” Engstrom for the heads up on this one)… More follow-up on the Massachusetts cleantech cluster… Joel has an interesting column on the information [...]

]]> By: Adena DeMonte at Earth2Tech wrote: http://www.xconomy.com/boston/2007/08/13/directing-clean-energy-investment-in-massachusetts-an-xconomy-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-451 Adena DeMonte at Earth2Tech wrote: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:33:33 +0000 http://www.xconomy.com/2007/08/13/directing-clean-energy-investment-in-massachusetts-an-xconomy-debate/#comment-451 [...] Not everyone is happy with the sector’s higher growth rate for renewable energy over energy efficiency. Critics say that renewable energy is a risky investment, and are concerned about the amount of jobs being created in such a young and volatile segment of the clean energy industry. Of the 116 clean energy companies founded since 2001, 77 were renewable energy companies while just 20 of the companies focused on energy efficiency. [...] [...] Not everyone is happy with the sector’s higher growth rate for renewable energy over energy efficiency. Critics say that renewable energy is a risky investment, and are concerned about the amount of jobs being created in such a young and volatile segment of the clean energy industry. Of the 116 clean energy companies founded since 2001, 77 were renewable energy companies while just 20 of the companies focused on energy efficiency. [...]

]]> By: Curt Fischer http://www.xconomy.com/boston/2007/08/13/directing-clean-energy-investment-in-massachusetts-an-xconomy-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-445 Curt Fischer Mon, 13 Aug 2007 23:36:52 +0000 http://www.xconomy.com/2007/08/13/directing-clean-energy-investment-in-massachusetts-an-xconomy-debate/#comment-445 As the debate starts to percolate around the site here, I am wondering about the distinction between two concepts: energy investing and energy ventures. I'm no expert, but I imagine one could argue that projects to improve hydrocarbon energy usage and extraction, as well as projects toward demand reduction, would fit well inside the already-made-it big name firms. BP, Schlumberger, Toyota, electric utilities...why aren't these kinds of companies the best to push after hydrocarbons and energy efficiency? If you buy into that argument, Massachusetts' relative proliferation of renewable energy *ventures* could be explained--all the energy *investing* in the bigger slices of the energy pie would be going inside big firms. And big firms don't seem to be where Bill or Wade are looking. (The MTC survey for example, seemed heavily skewed towards start-up activity.) Again, I'm no expert---I'm just looking for clarification: Is Bill arguing that there are unmet *venture* opportunities in hydrocarbons and efficiency, or that Massachusetts in underinvesting in these areas as a whole? As the debate starts to percolate around the site here, I am wondering about the distinction between two concepts: energy investing and energy ventures.

I’m no expert, but I imagine one could argue that projects to improve hydrocarbon energy usage and extraction, as well as projects toward demand reduction, would fit well inside the already-made-it big name firms. BP, Schlumberger, Toyota, electric utilities…why aren’t these kinds of companies the best to push after hydrocarbons and energy efficiency?

If you buy into that argument, Massachusetts’ relative proliferation of renewable energy *ventures* could be explained–all the energy *investing* in the bigger slices of the energy pie would be going inside big firms. And big firms don’t seem to be where Bill or Wade are looking. (The MTC survey for example, seemed heavily skewed towards start-up activity.)

Again, I’m no expert—I’m just looking for clarification: Is Bill arguing that there are unmet *venture* opportunities in hydrocarbons and efficiency, or that Massachusetts in underinvesting in these areas as a whole?

]]> By: Bill Aulet http://www.xconomy.com/boston/2007/08/13/directing-clean-energy-investment-in-massachusetts-an-xconomy-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-441 Bill Aulet Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:00:15 +0000 http://www.xconomy.com/2007/08/13/directing-clean-energy-investment-in-massachusetts-an-xconomy-debate/#comment-441 Just to clarify the above quote on the “small pie” for renewables, renewables is not a small pie at all — it will be very large because it is part of such a large industry. The point is that it is a relatively small part of the overall energy pie and getting a strikingly disproportionate amount of the attention at this time for some good reasons and some bad reason. I think they over time there will be more investment in the other areas required to solve the energy challenge which is the fundamental premise of the article. Renewables is still a good place for a lot of people to be spending a good deal of time and money. For all of our sakes, hopefully it will turn out to be very successful and impactful. Just to clarify the above quote on the “small pie” for renewables, renewables is not a small pie at all — it will be very large because it is part of such a large industry. The point is that it is a relatively small part of the overall energy pie and getting a strikingly disproportionate amount of the attention at this time for some good reasons and some bad reason. I think they over time there will be more investment in the other areas required to solve the energy challenge which is the fundamental premise of the article. Renewables is still a good place for a lot of people to be spending a good deal of time and money. For all of our sakes, hopefully it will turn out to be very successful and impactful.

]]>