Comments on: Opinion: Why Venture Capital Needs to Back More “Now” Innovations http://earth2tech.com/2009/11/05/opinion-why-venture-capital-needs-to-back-more-now-innovations/ Helping the Earth with Technology Tue, 09 Feb 2010 23:51:28 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Earth2Tech Week in Review http://earth2tech.com/2009/11/05/opinion-why-venture-capital-needs-to-back-more-now-innovations/#comment-41599 Earth2Tech Week in Review Sat, 07 Nov 2009 20:01:32 +0000 http://earth2tech.com/?p=44670#comment-41599 <p>[...] Opinion: Why Venture Capital Needs to Back More “Now” Innovations: The current pace of progress won’t help us reach the emission reduction levels needed to avoid the serious climate change impacts forecast for 2050. The solution? Pump as much venture capital into “Now” innovations as we do into new technology. [...]</p> [...] Opinion: Why Venture Capital Needs to Back More “Now” Innovations: The current pace of progress won’t help us reach the emission reduction levels needed to avoid the serious climate change impacts forecast for 2050. The solution? Pump as much venture capital into “Now” innovations as we do into new technology. [...]

]]> By: Michael Lach http://earth2tech.com/2009/11/05/opinion-why-venture-capital-needs-to-back-more-now-innovations/#comment-41542 Michael Lach Fri, 06 Nov 2009 19:18:48 +0000 http://earth2tech.com/?p=44670#comment-41542 <p>Since irrigation water use is such a large issue regarding the amount of water we use for irrigation why not start there in designing and using a better product? <a href="http://www.irrigationthatmakessense.org" title="green irrigation } landscaping ideas | green landscaping | green financing" rel="nofollow">http://www.IrrigationThatMakesSense.org</a> is a non profit group trying to battle our national water issues by providing funding and installation of green irrigation products. They have a irrigation product that conserves up to 80% of water use after two years. Their product is installed sub-surface therefore you never see it watering. It makes the plants stronger, uses less fertilizer along with water and no over spray onto sidewalks and roads. The cost to install their underground irrigation product is comparable to overhead sprinklers but this is the green irrigation choice.</p> Since irrigation water use is such a large issue regarding the amount of water we use for irrigation why not start there in designing and using a better product? http://www.IrrigationThatMakesSense.org is a non profit group trying to battle our national water issues by providing funding and installation of green irrigation products. They have a irrigation product that conserves up to 80% of water use after two years. Their product is installed sub-surface therefore you never see it watering. It makes the plants stronger, uses less fertilizer along with water and no over spray onto sidewalks and roads. The cost to install their underground irrigation product is comparable to overhead sprinklers but this is the green irrigation choice.

]]> By: Josie Garthwaite http://earth2tech.com/2009/11/05/opinion-why-venture-capital-needs-to-back-more-now-innovations/#comment-41533 Josie Garthwaite Fri, 06 Nov 2009 16:51:00 +0000 http://earth2tech.com/?p=44670#comment-41533 <p>well said!</p> well said!

]]> By: Ram Nidumolu http://earth2tech.com/2009/11/05/opinion-why-venture-capital-needs-to-back-more-now-innovations/#comment-41529 Ram Nidumolu Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:21:19 +0000 http://earth2tech.com/?p=44670#comment-41529 <p>Great idea! I think "now" innovations are the equivalent of shovel-ready projects in the federal stimulus -- they are more likely to create jobs immediately, provide returns in the short-term, and also encourage additional investments in other kinds of innovations.</p> <p>The risks with longer-term innovations is that people (and businesses) don't have the patience or means to wait for payback, and returns are unpredictable given a shifting landscape. "Now" innovations address these problems.</p> <p>I think the task for investors would be to carefully delineate between these immediate-payoff innovations and the longer-term ones and ask how one can lead to the other, so that the investment can be leveraged.</p> <p>Ram</p> Great idea! I think “now” innovations are the equivalent of shovel-ready projects in the federal stimulus — they are more likely to create jobs immediately, provide returns in the short-term, and also encourage additional investments in other kinds of innovations.

The risks with longer-term innovations is that people (and businesses) don’t have the patience or means to wait for payback, and returns are unpredictable given a shifting landscape. “Now” innovations address these problems.

I think the task for investors would be to carefully delineate between these immediate-payoff innovations and the longer-term ones and ask how one can lead to the other, so that the investment can be leveraged.

Ram

]]> By: Ed Penn http://earth2tech.com/2009/11/05/opinion-why-venture-capital-needs-to-back-more-now-innovations/#comment-41482 Ed Penn Thu, 05 Nov 2009 23:56:29 +0000 http://earth2tech.com/?p=44670#comment-41482 <p>Fannie Mae asks for $15 billion in US aid after posting $19.8 billion third quarter loss. They will have close to 110 billion if they pull this loan that they never will be able to repay off. What is the Green Energy project getting, sixty billion? I say the government matches green energy and job growth funds to the bank bail outs. The bank bail out has a 400 billion dollar cap for Fannie and Freddie. Who knows where all those assets are, or worth for that matter. We have a energy grid to build, can I say it? FOR CRYIN OUT LOUD! whew... I would see plenty of green growth and conservation if 400 billion was allocated towards green energy and green jobs. The bank bail out price tag appears to lower one week and grow the next. Green technology would lower carbon one week and create jobs the next. I choose the latter, I'm Andy Rooney, nah :-)just kidding.... good night.</p> Fannie Mae asks for $15 billion in US aid after posting $19.8 billion third quarter loss. They will have close to 110 billion if they pull this loan that they never will be able to repay off. What is the Green Energy project getting, sixty billion? I say the government matches green energy and job growth funds to the bank bail outs. The bank bail out has a 400 billion dollar cap for Fannie and Freddie. Who knows where all those assets are, or worth for that matter. We have a energy grid to build, can I say it? FOR CRYIN OUT LOUD! whew… I would see plenty of green growth and conservation if 400 billion was allocated towards green energy and green jobs. The bank bail out price tag appears to lower one week and grow the next. Green technology would lower carbon one week and create jobs the next. I choose the latter, I’m Andy Rooney, nah :-)just kidding…. good night.

]]>