Energy security and business

An interesting document has come out of Lloyds that reveals some of their thinking about energy security, and the risks and opportunities it provides for business.

Lloyds point out that 300 years of experience has given them a bit of an understanding of risk, and it is from that platform that they suggest that now is a really good time to get serious about finding ‘a new energy paradigm’.

The summary says that The primary purpose of this report is to remind the reader that all businesses, not just the energy sector, need to consider how they, their suppliers and their customers will be affected by energy supplies which are less reliable and more expensive…reputations will be won or lost as the public demands that businesses reduce their environmental footprint.’

The report includes some of the bad news for those wishing things could just stay the same, with key points like :

  • Businesses which prepare for and take advantage of the new energy reality will prosper – failure to do so could be catastrophic
  • Market dynamics and environmental factors mean business can no longer rely on low cost traditional energy sources
  • We are heading towards a global oil supply crunch and price spike
  • Energy infrastructure will become increasingly vulnerable as a result of climate change and operations in harsher environments

The (potentially) good news is captured too :

  • Investment in renewable energy and ‘intelligent’ infrastructure is booming. This revolution presents huge opportunities for new business partnerships

We have a history of creative design and innovation, and developing both hardware and software to support clean – tech approaches is an area where we could reap real economic success and make a positive contribution to managing climate change.  All we need now is a government that understands the opportunity and will create the policy settings to help make it happen!

5 Comments Posted

  1. jc2-My proposal was tongue in cheek because our democratic system does not discriminate, it is the voter who decides the criteria that they value when electing our MPs. Obviously this time many voters felt that Anne Tolley has the knowledge and ability to dictate what happens in education and Gerry Brownlee knows what is best for conservation (above the Minister of Conservation and the EPA). The fact that neither Minister is prepared to engage with research and fully debate the facts must be traits valued by those that voted for them.

  2. Sprout, to make the prerequisite real, you have to work out who’s going to enforce it, and what the sanctions are when they abuse their power.

  3. David Clendon says “tech approaches is an area where we could reap real economic success and make a positive contribution to managing climate change.”

    I agree completely, and have been saying exactly the same thing on this website, but I keep getting shot down by some Green supporters.

    New technology is making big inroads – soon we will have economically viable wave and tidal generation, solar is getting cheaper, battery technology is advancing, gearbox technology has led to a massive 20% efficiency gain in some car models in a single year, heat pumps are 300% more efficient than std heaters (and replace coal fires), newer houses are far better insulated, new planes are 20% more efficient, and advances will contuinue.

    Not too far away, some cities will replace congestion charges with “electic only” zoned CBDs. And many people will have their town car and their long distance car.

  4. “Sustainable Business = Good Business” is such a simple but obvious concept you would think they should get it, yet we have constant evidence (National Standards, mining) that there is a lot they don’t get.

    Maybe there needs to be a basic prerequisite that all MP’s need to pass a simple assessment of their ability to crtitique research (also demonstrating an ability to comprehend it) and to demonstrate an ability to actively consult with others. If this had been done before the last election I would imagine a good number of our Ministers wouldn’t be sitting in parliament.

Comments are closed.