In an earlier post I lauded Angela Merkel for seeing greentech (or cleantech) as a means to propel Germany and the EU out of the recent recession and not just a bone to throw out to voters, like some Canadian politicians seem to view it. Turns out that Greentech allround has truly come into itself as a strong investment engine once again, not only in Europe but here in North America and perhaps most of all in China. It’s only taken 30 years- including Tesla’s inventions about 100 years I suppose- but I’m feeling pretty positive about the recent news that Cleantech has become the largest U.S. venture capital sector and that China’s cleantech market was now potentially valued at one trillion annually. But really, we have few other options considering the finite and externality plagued industrial sectors of old are running out of gas- literally. So is it Obama’s generous opening of future American’s wallets that has caused this impressive growth? Some believe it is. I’ve been critical of Obama not putting enough funding into specific large scale greentech projects in the past- but maybe he and his super genius advisors knew that the scent of government funding to VC is like the scent of blood to sharks. In any event the funding for greentech still remains lower than it was in 2008 according to Daily Finance but the news is positive.

Instead of a frenzy of survival investments, the “IPO market has clearly reopened” as  Parker Weil, co-director of the Merrill Lynch and Bank of America’s North America Energy and Power Group stated at a recent conference in San Francisco. Basing this belief on a number of things but perhaps most notably on the explosive success of A123 Systems’ IPO on the market late last month.  As the A123 System website shows, they were recipients of a US Department of Energy Grant to build better batteries. That grant money came out of the Obama stimulus bill. So maybe my past criticisms can be abayed for now.

So what’s going on in Canada and in British Columbia?

Well, in Alberta the new Carbon Technology Fund has been growing thanks to the abundance of greenhouse gas emitters in that province. Now with $120 million to burn, Greentech is the buzzword in Edmonton.

In March Ontario announced a $250 million Greentech fund while shortly after that the Canadian Federal Government launched a $850-million clean energy fund, about $650-million of which goes more or less directly to Alberta in the form of carbon capture and storage initiatives. Something I believe the oil companies should be using their insane profits for instead of receiving tax dollars.

In Vancouver, Premier Campbell and Minister Stockwell Day celebrated the arrival of a hydrogen fuel cell powered bus.  The bus is the first of what will eventually be the world’s largest fleet of fuel cell busses at 20 strong. The 2008 BC energy plan makes lots of noise about new emissions standards and in the process through the ICE (Innovative Clean Energy Fund) has “approved investments of over $47 million in 34 projects” throughout communities in the province (even though the fund is only $25-million) helping to develop clean and renewable energy; the exact details of which I would love to know. The Provincial Liberals seem committed to hydrogen, even though it has proved to be less viable than other forms of energy. Could it be that when they started thinking clean was cool, Ballard’s stock was roaring, and they haven’t really put much thought into it since? In any event, the fact that a new coal mine in the province is being seriously proposed, discredits any green credentials the current BC government is trying to build in my opion.  And the mine has nothing to do with our energy needs either- 40% owned by Japanese and South Korean interests it will be for coking, in the manufacturing of steel products made in those countries. Much like Norwegian Salmon Farming corporations who own 90% of industrially farmed salmon operations in BC, keeping the profits but leaving the province with 100% of the pollution and problems, the BC government is keen to open the door to our environment to foreign interests once again. If the BC liberals really want to get greentech cred they’d embrace closed containment technology for salmon farms, like China has for trout, and put a stop to the Raven Site mine proposal.  Both activities will otherwise take their environmental tolls in the same area of our Province, the Georgia Strait. And to the overall health of our environment globally.

So to sum it up, BC is being outdone by both China and Alberta when it comes to investing in clean, green technologies. How does that make you feel? You Alberta and China slagging, granola chewing, MacBook using, lululemon wearing, mountain biking, grouse grinding British Columbian?

$25 million to greentech in our province? And 100 million to a new coal mine? When Alberta is dwarfing BC in funding for cleantech, and China is embracing the clean technologies produced and rejected here, you have to shake your head and wonder how hypocritical it makes us look? Or rather how hypocritical the current provincial government make us look? Maybe, if and when, Gregor Robertson is Premier, he’ll take the same kind of leadership he’s shown in Vancouver with the Vancouver Greenest City initiative and we can really have something to show for in the province. Until then, we’re chasing the cleantech train instead of riding it.

I love watching Mad Men. It’s one of my favorite, actually one of the only shows, that I watch. The concepts of how to connect to the mind and heart of the consumer- how to create the consumer, to seduce them, win their trust and money, the sexual politics, breaking of stereotypes, the smoking and scotch drinking in the office. Wait…what am I blogging about? Oh yeah.

Now we’re poking around with nanobots deep inside our heads, hoping to understand just how we can create the perfect mustard advertisement that reaches the synaptic network where desire for mustard is located. I don’t know that for a fact, but it wouldn’t surprise me. We’ve even begun to study political phenomena like why you voted for Obama (seriously, click on that link- it’s an amazing lecture) or why you believe in the existence of God, based on the activity in our brains.

I have one question though. As our public education systems fail and as successive generations of kids appear exponentially dumber than the last, will all this work really be necessary? It’s not like the marketing world is competing to win the purchasing habits of modern day Voltaires. What’s the number one hit song with the kids right now? Birthday Sex? I bet in a generation or two we could simply put a half naked woman on any product and that would do the trick. Or maybe pictures of explosions and shiny things-that and some words saying what it was, if we’re still able to read.

For the time being though, this field of cognitive science will continue to be a frontier of the marketing world. As we continue to believe that we are a lot more complex and smarter than we actually are.

Should internet traffic speed be regulated? How should it be managed? Are throttling practices by ISPs illegal or unfair? And how involved should the government be? These were a few of the issues floating around the room at the recent CRTC hearings on internet traffic management practices in Canada. Much like the Brand-X debate in the U.S. this has become a major issue for those of us interested in what goes on online.

What was most interesting about these hearings was how absolutely active the public were on social media platforms, from the minute it opened to well after it had ended. As the hearings progressed, thousands of messages darted through Twitter accounts and other social media sites, including from the corporate delegates present; reaching out to a public that very much wanted to assert itself. It was a reclamation of involvement in what has traditionally been an increasingly entrenched bureaucracy- seemingly out of touch with the public, despite its many mandates to serve them.

Governments have been searching for ways to adapt themselves to Web 2.0 and the Obama Administration in particular serves as an example. Here in Vancouver, the city has made all of its data open and accessible to citizens as part of its efforts to embrace Web 2.0, greentech, and other high tech initiatives. With open access to information it’s hoped that research and innovation will be nurtured, another signal that Vancouver is on the offensive to assert itself as a leading city in the global information economy.

Now start encouraging some more commercial highrise space downtown please, city hall. That way the next major software and technology firm won’t have to locate in Richmond.

As for the CRTC hearings, the debate on throttling and who is allowed to do what on the internet continues to evolve in Ottawa into a rats nest of opinions. Google blames Bell for harming net neutrality, while others in Canada become wary of Google draining universities of their top tech and software graduates, potentially impeding or having dominance over the Canadian software industry.

One thing is for sure. Unlike many other important and historical decisions made in Ottawa, the public are involved this time.

If Canada ever hopes to surpass Greenland as an innovative high tech internet leader, we have to continue to come together in the way we did at these CRTC hearings. I’m proud of you Canada. Tweet. (single tear)

As news spread of Michael Jackson’s death millions of news hungry people turned to websites to confirm the verifiability of that story. And the Jeff Goldblum story too…but let’s not get into that. Several prominent sites crashed under the weight of so much sudden traffic, leaving many in agonizing confusion. Increasingly, governments at all levels are now looking to use distributed databases linked in through secure servers not only to educate the public but to sync essential services through an organized and accessible user friendly interface. Data.gov is emblematic of this new government love affair with the internet. So what happens when Michael Jackson syndrome hits in the form of a major disaster, a tsunami on the west coast, an asteroid, earthquake, alien invasion…how much faith can we place in our information infrastructure to deal with sudden massive spikes in activity, especially when crucial life or death information is needed? With 7.2 billion dollars in the recent American bailout package specified for broadband infrastructure improvement one would hope to rest assured. The only problem is that your distant rural cousins Cletus and Jedediah, somewhere deep in the Smokey Mountains are really the focus of this money as some critics complain. The crashes we saw recently weren’t coming from there, they were coming from us urban folks- tweeting like crazy and dying to known what Perez Hilton was saying. Give us more broadband space!

An example. As the economic recession hit its stride, state government servers failed as countless unemployed were directed to government sites to apply online for assistance or read through FAQs.

If National, regional and municipal governments of the world continue to develop policies that incorporate the internet, whether for creation of information portals, use of social media in involving public in policy directions, as Obama is keen to do, or as a one stop shop for everything from unemployment to disaster management, they’d better create departments of web server maintenance. ‘Cause when the s–t goes down, the site better not. In Canada, our cabinet could now include a Minister of Internet Server Security. Or maybe yet, as I listen to my liberal economics angel on the other shoulder, we could leave it up to the market as they say. There are SEO and web hosting companies for this kind of thing right? In any event it’s time for governments to get serious about site management and server management if they intend to maximize the usability of the virtual bureaucracy now being programmed into existence. Data.gov is a laudable idea, but if unemployment and Michael Jackson are crashing websites around the country, it makes me question the faith I can put in .gov sites to cope with the imminent alien invasion that we the educated population know is coming.

Google and Microsoft, two of the smallest and most modest technology companies in the world, finally get a chance to have their tiny, modest voices heard by the upper echelons of the U.S. government. The Obama administration just appointed the CEO of Google, Eric Schmidt, and Microsoft’s Chief Research and Strategy Officer, Craig Mundie, to the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST).

The council is an advisory board made up some of the nation’s top scientists and engineers. And, snarking aside, this move is significant. Those in the know are whispering that it could mark a small but significant shift away from the anti-science/anti-technology stance of the lil’ Bush Whitehouse. Said Obama, “I will charge PCAST with advising me about national strategies to nurture and sustain a culture of scientific innovation.”

More concretely, the appointments may be an even bigger and better deal for those who support net neutrality. Both Google and Microsoft are publicly in favor of net neutrality, so having their voices in the President’s ear could help further the cause. And it’s a cause that seems to be getting some attention these days, especially with some of that federal stimulus money being spent on broadband deployment.

One thing that isn’t addressed in any of these articles, though, is this question: Will the U.S. government use the combined powers of Google and Microsoft to aid in the hunt for Osama Bin Laden? If so, the search engine’s help will obviously make locating him easy, but sources indicate there is concern that any attempt to kill him will be delayed for ten minutes by a critical Vista update….

…thanks, drive safe, I’ll be here all week!