A ceramic water filter by Starting Basic Water Needs India Pty Ltd

This month, EcoSociable.com is increasing its coverage of clean technology and technologists around the globe. Our objective is to break down the conventional filters and screens to access to clean technology finance and media coverage. To build a truly sustainable economy, we need to draw on the ingenuity of all global citizens. We uniquely cover clean technology developments from every corner of the globe. We are always looking for interesting clean technologies and companies to share with EcoSociable followers. If you have an interesting clean technology story — or that of a client, relative, friend… — share it with the Ecosociable network.  

Storms on the Black Sea have been known to sink modern Russian ships, so spirits were high at Israeli-based Eco Wave Power (EWP) when on several recent stormy days its wave power buoys successfully harvested sea wave energy and converted it into clean electricity. Not only did the buoys combat the elements but they also demonstrated good energy efficiency.  An impressive performance by any standards yet wave power is only now starting to garner the investment attention it deserves.

This bobbing energy plant could be a key technology in what Jeremy Rifkin calls our ‘new economic journey’ to a green energy future in his book the Third Industrial Revolution.  David Leb, EWP founder believes his buoys can deliver energy generation economics far below not only those of wind and solar but also fossil fuel. And like Jeremy Rifkin, one of David’s inspirations, he believes that this medium-sized power plant will power our economic future.

 “My belief is that green energy in general, and wave energy in particular, can be and will be extremely profitable. The clean energy field has great economic potential, as well as the potential of creating new workplaces that will significantly minimize the world’s unemployment rates.”

The attractive economics David proffers are not just roadshow chatter for the investor circuit. Eco Wave Power was awarded Frost & Sullivan’s Product Innovation Award for the cost-efficiency advantages it is introducing to wave power.  Based on Frost & Sullivan’s independent performance measurements, EWP’s technology was recognized for its level of efficiency while harvesting energy from high and low waves.

Critically, such energy efficient technology will create jobs, says David who points to Elon Musk as a model of the clean energy business of the future. ”Elon is an entrepreneur who was able to create profitable cars, with no gas emissions. His business generated significant profits, creating many workplaces at the same time.” EWP has itself become a model, demonstrating how a home spun energy technology can generate large environmental and economic spin-offs.

“I established Eco Wave Power Company in order to inspire students, engineers, policy makers and entrepreneurs to follow our footsteps, care about our environment, research new energy harvesting methods and invest in new ideas.”

Motivated by the desire to create a pollution-free environment for his children and grandchildren, this green energy entrepreneur wants to bring on the competition.

“I challenge you to compete with our company, and create the best green energy generation projects. My wish is that due to our work there will be more energy startups, similar to the startup boom that was present during the initial internet era.”

EWP’s objective in entering the competitive wave power market was to develop technology that addressed the high capital costs of wave power technology.

 ”We believe that by decreasing the energy harvesting prices to the lowest possible, we will create a catalyst for other companies, startups and entrepreneurs to get into this industry.”

The technology behind Eco Wave Power’s buoys, the Wave Clapper and the Power Wing, was conceived of while David sat on the beach at his surf camp in Panama and watched the surfers in the Pacific Ocean harness the power of the waves. Today, EWP is using uniquely shaped buoys to capture and convert that wave energy into clean electricity. Like the best surfers, these buoys can adeptly ride out stormy weather and rough waves using a proprietary automatic control system. Moreover, the buoy orients to the exact direction of the wave, thereby harvesting sea wave energy continuously and more efficiently. EWP’s technology may not look as elegant as some other marine power solutions but behind this simplistic-looking energy plant is advanced technology that is delivering cost and performance benefits, such as EWP’s corrosion resistant material.

It may be as Rifkin imagined it and we are at the peak of the industrial revolution.  No doubt, wave power technology will be part of the powerful new infrastructure of the third revolution.

“My sustainable innovation dream is a city powered by wave energy. Such a city will serve as the perfect show case of the great ability of wave power to produce significant and cost-efficient electricity for large populations. It will also show the business community that renewable energy can be both green, and profitable. I always say, “let’s make green electricity, but also green money.”

What is the greenest thing you do in a day?

Work on linkages between poverty eradication and sustainable energy.

If you could make one sustainable innovation dream come true, what would it be?

Linking all income generation for the poor with sustainable technologies!
What is your motivation for supporting a sustainable economy through positive environmental initiatives?

Poverty eradication.

Who is your Green Hero of the planet?

Local farmers around the world – who know how to conserve with little.

According to Dr. Harish Hande, we could all take a lesson in sustainable development from local farmers around the world.  Through necessity, these farmers have learned how to develop sustainable resources with very few.  The SELCO India managing director has demonstrated the same ingenuity by using solar technology to help eradicate poverty and stimulate economic growth in India.  Rather than light up India’s fast growing middle class, Dr. Hande chose to provide solar power services to the poorest people in India.  Today, SELCO is the leading solar technology company in India.

For all the media coverage and rewards, Dr. Hande has not forgotten why he started the solar electric light company. “The majority of the world’s 1.6 billion un-electrified population lives in India. More than half of the women and children who die in the world because of indoor air pollution are Indian,” he explains at the World Economic Forum.  While his colleagues secured comfortable positions in private equity firms investing in hot technology startups, Dr. Hande used his doctorate in energy engineering to install solar systems in rural India.

Today, a regular presenter at prestigious economic forums among Nobel Prize winners, Dr. Hande is promoting an important economic growth model.  This social entrepreneur believes that the transformation to a sustainable economy can alleviate poverty by putting people to work developing sustainable energies.  It is a model that many world leaders and economists are promoting but Hande is one of the precious few who have actually put it into practice and shown that it can work.

Dr. Hande’s pathway to head up India’s leading solar company has an ironic twist.  The Energy Engineering department that gave him his B.A. specializing in solar closed down in 2007, as its most successful student developed one of India’s leading solar technology companies.  This poignant yet eye opening story underscores the disconnect between government policy in training and education and economic realities.  The results point to a promising future for solar .  SELCO, which has installed 120,000 solar systems in India, employs  hundreds of people, and continues to add to its workforce as it expands into new regions.  What does not show up as easily in the numbers is the improvement in the quality of life of millions of Indians, through access to cheap electricity and jobs.

Significantly, SELCO is a social enterprise successfully running as a commercial business and model for others.  Dr. Hande has shown how a commercial enterprise can operate more effectively by thinking like a social enterprise.  “Restructuring the thought process from technology towards needs means you not only give people what they actually need, you also give it at a reduced price.  Supplying technology to people without understanding their needs is out of place.  At SELCO, we extend a service to people not technology or product.” Times of India

While to some Matthew Simmons’ message remains unheard, to others he is their hero. Matthew Simmons founded and became chairman emeritus of the Simmons & Company International and was a well-regarded figure when it came to the field of peak  Simmons was motivated by the 1973 energy crisis to form an investment banking firm to aid oil companies. He had served as an energy adviser to then United States President George W. Bush and was a member up until his death of the National Petroleum Council, as well as the Council on Foreign Relations. He died at his vacation home in North Haven, Maine on August 8, 2010 because of “accidental drowning with heart disease as the contributing factor”.

Simmons authored the well received book published in 2005: Twilight in the Desert: The Coming Saudi Oil Shock and the World Economy. He mobilized a growing awareness toward the depletion of oil reserves and the unreliability of Middle East oil reserves. Because of his advocacy — he spoke to thousands regarding Peak Oil and the water shortages — world governments increased support for sustainable energy solutions many years before the signs of Peak Oil began to be felt. Simmons was also the founder of the Ocean Energy Institute in Maine, which supports his vision of making Maine the leader in energy in areas including offshore wind and ocean power.

Simmons was a very good analyst especially when it came to identifying big trends and was pretty much comfortable challenging conventional wisdom. As much as he was concerned about the current effects of peak oil, his knowledge extended far beyond the near term. During an oil industry tour in Saudi Arabia in 2003, he got the inspiration to estimate the world’s biggest oil reserves. Through extensive research that involved poring through engineering data which has been supposedly neglected, he came to the conclusion that the country was very close to its peak output. Through this knowledge, he was able to successfully build his own energy firm and challenge one of its most accepted precepts – that the quantity of oil in the world is nearly unlimited.

According to Simmons during his slide presentation at the Offshore Technology Conference in Houston, the demand for energy has turned into a “runaway train that cannot be easily slowed or reversed.” According to him, the world is now in the early stages of a global train wreck in which demand is higher than the supply and the shortages are starting.

The controversy surrounding peak oil is more or less politically based. Those who believe that peak oil is near and we are running out of  fossil fuels are making efforts to prepare the economy for future shock and the decline in oil, as well as price hikes due to increasing demand. While those who continue to contend that there is nothing wrong are often connected with the oil industry and fossil fuels and believe that fears of the decline are alarmist.

Today, even oil company executives acknowledge that we are running out of oil, and an acute shortage could be felt as early as 2015.

Who is going to pay for climate change?

We surprised even ourselves by our suggestion in our last editorial to tax carbon trading. Are taxes the tools of lazy politicians? Are we simply not smart enough to find a better solution? Or well-intentioned enough to  bring all sides together at the negotiating table?

Since we made the suggestion of taxing carbon trading, we have had more time to mull it over. Rather than tax everyone, let’s leave the hedgers and carbon project managers alone. Let’s tax the speculators!

Having spent too much time around financial types in New York, London and elsewhere, we were conditioned to believe that taxing financial activity was a bad thing — anti-free markets and so forth. We scowled at the Tobin Tax — Noble Laureate James Tobin’s proposal to tax currency trading. We liked the economic model but taxing free markets was bad, as in Chicago School bad.

Climate change, however, is another matter. After all, we may not be here to tax currency trading, cigarettes, or anything else for that matter  if we cannot finance climate change adaptation strategies. It may sound hyperbolic but it is not for some parts of the world today, such as small island nations that are already struggling for survival.

And, yes, in an ideal world we do believe that speculators should be able to choose their altruistic deeds. Our climate options have become less than ideal because we have been debating for too long on how to proceed. It is time to more forward.

As we write this, IndiaToday.com is asking why the climate change fund is an empty shell. Between 2010 and 2012, the Green Climate Fund (GCF) to help poor countries adapt to climate change was supposed to have $30 billion in its coffers, an amount expected to grow to $100 billion annually by 2020. Who is going to fund the climate change fund?

Imagine this! Klara the uber hedge fund manager wakes up early on Monday morning, turns on her iPad and sees that the currency and carbon markets are roiling with volatility. Both markets provide attractive trading opportunities for this short-term speculative trader. Klara decides the altruistic investment is the better one.  She places some bets in carbon credits — observes the 2 percent climate change tax (the proceeds of which go to the GCF fund) deducted together with her trading fees.

Klara makes some money in the carbon markets (minus the climate change tax) while simultaneously contributing funding to help communities worldwide develop and implement climate change adaptation strategies.  Playing the carbon market feels good — a lot better than shorting the British pound and taking a few dollars from her hedge fund counterparts.

In effect, by imposing the climate change tax on speculators, speculating in carbon credits becomes a choice to invest in a social good. As an asset class, speculative carbon trading becomes a social investment. Besides the adaptation funds, there is another advantage to turning carbon trading into a social good. Traders may feel a responsibility to trade more responsibly in carbon credits; otherwise, that ‘feel good’ feeling of having done something altruistic could go away. Carbon credit prices may not plummet as far each time politicians vacillate on renewing climate change agreements.

By repackaging carbon trading  (and trading in other pollutant emissions markets, current and emerging) as a social good, we think more and more traders will wake up in the morning and, say, hey, why not dabble in the carbon markets and do some social good today.

What obstacles do you see to taxing carbon trading? Would it deter or encourage speculative trading in emissions markets?

Naderev Sano, Phillippines Negotiator at Doha:

“I appeal to the whole world, I appeal to leaders from all over the world, to open our eyes to the stark reality that we face. I appeal to ministers. The outcome of our work is not about what our political masters want. It is about what is demanded of us by 7 billion people.

“I appeal to all, please, no more delays, no more excuses. Please, let Doha be remembered as the place where we found the political will to turn things around. Please, let 2012 be remembered as the year the world found the courage to find the will to take responsibility for the future we want. I ask of all of us here, if not us, then who? If not now, then when? If not here, then where?”

Doha has the highest emissions per capita

As climate scientists debate over whether global warming on Jupiter, Mars, Neptune, Pluto and Triton is being caused by the same forces heating up mother earth, climate talks here on earth have reached a stalemate.

Climate talks have been deadlocked by the same issues since their inception. Developed countries want developing countries to curb more of their carbon emissions. The US continues to lead the charge for large emitters China, India, Brazil and others to make larger commitments to cutting greenhouse gas emissions. Developing countries want developed countries to provide financing and technology transfer to do so.

Let’s move beyond the impasse. The market-based mechanisms under the Kyoto Protocol — the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JI) — are good ones.   They are threatened by the failure of politicians to reach agreement on climate change. We have until January 2013 to reach a new agreement. At this time last year during the Durban summit we wrote about why we should stop sending politicians to the climate change negotiating table.

Despite the disregard for its successes, the CDM continues to do its good work. As the politicians quibble, an Azerbaijani power project has become the first in the world to earn carbon credits through energy efficiency modernization. Over 10 years, the project is expected to generate over 10 million carbon credits.  These credits will be traded in the carbon emissions markets, providing the opportunity to offset the cost of financing new clean technology projects.

The way for Doha is to strengthen market-based mechanisms. Developing countries do not need global warming aid. The present climate change negotiating round is asking developed countries to commit to scaling up such climate funding to $100 billion a year by 2020. Most of this money has been tagged for climate change adaptation strategies for developing countries — an issue in need of urgent action.

Here, too, market-based mechanisms are a better solution. What is truly needed, as the Azerbaijani project demonstrates, is the very cooperation on technological advances the CDM and JI encourage and support. Appending a modest tax to carbon trading activities would be a better way of financing a climate change fund. A successful model is the UN’s Adaptation Fund, which receives 2 percent of the proceeds from certified emissions reduction credits (CERs) generated by CDM projects.

The size of the global carbon market grew 11 percent to $176 billion in 2011, according to the World Bank. Trading in CERs carbon credits generated by CDM projects declined while speculative trading in carbon credits increased. Would it really be terrible for wealthy hedge funds to pay a small carbon tax?

A small tax on $176 billion will not easily add up to the annual contributions being demanded of developed countries but it is a start. And together with a concerted effort placed on market-based mechanisms and technology transfer, it could be enough.  The politicians may be asking for climate change aid but if you ask Africans, for example, they will tell you that they do not want aid. They want a Marshall Plan. Like the Marshall Plan, adaptation financing by developed countries should include loans. To avoid the cost of borrowing, countries will be incentivized to develop clean technologies and produce and trade carbon credits.

The present round of climate change talks are focused on gaining commitment to a second commitment period (CP2), which will serve as the binding emissions reductions regime until 2020.  In 2020, the Durban Platform (ADP) aims to require all nations to participate in emissions reductions. Under this larger market, use of the CDM and carbon trading will rapidly expand, making a modest tax on carbon trading a viable way of financing adaptation strategies.

After years of impressive technology progress yet comparatively modest commercial progress, the marine energy sector has the wind at its back.  Acting like competitors prepped at the starting line, marine energy companies leaped in unison out of the demonstration phase in September. Power plants harvesting wave and tidal energy are now in various stages of commercial development across the globe.

Over the last few weeks, progress toward the commercialization of wave and tidal power has been accelerated on many fronts.  An industry standard bearer, Ocean Power Technologies (OPT) has received the first federal commercial license for a wave power park in the US, a 1.5 megawatt (MW) project to be located off of the Oregon coast. In Australia, OPT has partnered with Lockheed Martin to develop the country’s first wave energy farm, a 19 MW farm off the Victoria coast.

In tidal power, Ocean Renewable Power has hooked the first tidal power energy to the US grid off of Maine’s banks, where tidal waves as high as 20 feet splash against the shore. Newfoundland’s Bay of Fundy, teaming with even higher waves, has received additional government funding towards the development of an offshore tidal farm that is expected to have the largest transmission capacity. The energy farm led by the Fundy Ocean Research Centre for Energy (FORCE) tidal energy project has the potential to power 20,000 homes. EDF’s 15,000 MW tidal park off of the Brittany coast, the world’s largest tidal installation, has just completed the installation of underwater cables to connect to the grid. The park is expected to be operational in 2014.  Several tidal power projects are being reconsidered, including one in the UK’s Severn estuary that was deemed unfeasible in 2011; and recomissioned, including France’s 240-megawatt Rance Tidal Power station, put in operation in 1966.

With the slowdown in the economy this summer, investors may have had more time to contemplate and calculate the great energy potential in the ocean’s waves. “The ocean energy field has great environmental and economic potential,” says David Leb, founder of Eco Wave Power (EWP). “Two-thirds of the world’s population is currently living up to 400km from the coastline. If this population could rely on clean and cost efficient wave power, then the global shortage of electricity could be completely diminished.”

Which brings us to the cost of marine power, the driving factor behind these frenetic development activities. Of the three major forms of marine energy, tidal power is currently the cheapest. The Ocean Energy Council estimates wave power to cost 7.5 cents kWh with technology and economies of scale improvements expected to bring costs down to around 4.5 cents kWh. The cost of ocean thermal energy conversion technology is also above fossil fuels.

In tidal power, in addition to technology efficiency, the Gibrat ratio – the difference between high and low tide – is a key cost factor. The Ocean Power Council cites Gibrat ratios at La Rance of 0.36, Severn 0.87 and Passamaquoddy in the Bay of Fundy 0.92. Capital costs are high for marine energy.* The Rance tidal plant, which took 20 years to recover its 100 million euro construction costs, today produces electricity below the cost of France’s cheap nuclear energy at 1.8 cents per kWh (Wikipedia). The main commercialization challenges up to this point have been the high prices of wave harvesting devices, notes Eco Wave’s Leb. “Ocean energy companies were and still are in a continuous struggle to decrease the construction and production costs of wave energy.”

The competition is intense among marine power gear makers, but there is still a lot of room to compete on innovation. Leb of Eco Wave Power, which recently took the Frost & Sullivan Product Innovation Award for the efficiencies it is bringing to wave power technology, expects his technology to generate clean electricity at a cost below both conventional and renewable energy (see David’s ecoFaces profile for more on the technical advances of EWP’s sea wave technology).

Over the next two years, all eyes will be on a Scottish competition to see how far wave and tidal energy gear makers can push costs and performance.  Offering the largest reward for renewables to date, through the Saltire Prize the Scottish government will award £10 million to the wave or tidal power technology that can demonstrate a commercially viable technology with the greatest electrical output (of at least 100 gigawatts).  Readying for the competition alongside Pelamis Wave Power, Aquamarine Power and Scottish Renewables, Dan Pearson, CEO of MeyGen comments on the race ahead, “The challenge requires highly efficient devices, and a high level of resource and robust technical capability that is comparable to conventional renewable energy power stations.”

Events of the past few weeks clearly show that the marine energy sector has found its sea legs.  As capital costs continue to decline, wave and tidal energy are poised to harness a good share of our future energy supply.

*(A number of reports analyze the wide variety of marine energy technologies and their respective capital costs. Wikipedia provides a good general overview of wave power and tidal power technologies.)

Many NGOs Have Viable Business Models

NGOs have grown from grassroots organizations lobbying major development and economic events to providing valuable environmental products and services. The Carbon Disclosure Project is an example of an NGO that has left some of its commercial competitors scrambling to catch up. The provider of carbon credit pricing and performance information had humble beginnings. Its founder Paul Dickinson knocked on the door of the corporate world and asked companies to disclose their carbon emissions. Today, over 80 percent of the world’s major corporations report emissions to the CDP, as do many cities. For-profit carbon data providers, among them the world’s leading information companies, can only watch with envy.

“Stepping away from the old-style NGO approach to companies, the CDP and its leaders are both optimistic and relentlessly pro-business. At the core of the organization’s mission is a commitment to the power of data to improve business performance,” says environmental strategy consultant Andrew Winston on the HBR Blog Network.

If you had the choice, would you invest in the NGO or the for-profit laggards? Many NGOs would make attractive investments for social investors seeking a social and financial return. So to add to our article on where to find green venture philanthropy opportunities, here is a list of NGOs.  Let’s get creative and explore potential investment opportunities.

The Climate Bonds Initiative – What about spinning an NGO into a carbon and project finance advisory firm.  This group is helping to evaluate and set standards for climate change bonds, thereby providing more credibility and long-term financing options for green projects.

Green Cross International brings safe and sanitary water to rural villages by installing water systems, including water pumps and rainwater harvesting systems, as well eco latrines.  It has recently signed on to the Platform for Global Water Solidarity, together with 25 other organizations, to bring clean water to 800 million people

Biofuels – A number of NGs are involved in biofuels, providing technical support and project development and management, such as the Green Africa Foundation and Centre for Indian Bamboo Resource and Technology, whose project management and technical services are not unlike those provided by a Bechtel or Siemens.

NGOs are involved in all facets the environmental markets, including clean water technology and projects, biofuels, sustainable tourism, and renewable energy.  No doubt, there is tremendous opportunity for a social venture model to be applied to this sector, leveraging the leading market expertise of the NGOs.

The Carbon Disclosure Project is a good model.  Today, it has grown into an information powerhouse, providing data and reports through its climate change, supply chain and water programs; and boasting the world’s largest repository of self-reported corporate environmental data.”  Nonetheless, the CDP is still an environmental lobbyist at heart. Rather than jump the fence and become a full-fledged capitalist, it is turning investors into activists. It has recently joined with 92 pension funds, asset managers, insurers and banks to call for further corporate carbon emissions reductions. “The Carbon Action initiative is an excellent means for AXA IM to evolve its existing support of CDP and highlight the importance of a low-carbon future by moving from disclosure into a more interactive engagement between investors and companies,” says Matt Christensen, global head of responsible investment at AXA Investment Managers.

Do you have any good sources or inspirations for venture philanthropy to share with our ecosociable investors?

The Princely House of LGT Venture Philanthropy has invested in Peru Waste Innovation. Waste collected will be used in an electronic waste treatment plant.

In recent weeks, on both sides of the Atlantic, the media is buzzing about venture philanthropists.  Venture philanthropy (VP) is investing in doing good, typically nonprofits and social enterprises, with the expectation of a return on the investment, or a balanced return for those who are truly altruistic. The investment philosophy is based on the premise that the old style of giving fails to motivate the nonprofit sector to operate efficiently.  In contrast, venture philanthropists are ‘impact’ investors. Their mission is to help the nonprofit sector optimize operating efficiencies and resources so they can have a greater social and environmental impact.

Despite the crossover from traditional investment markets, the traditional nonprofit sectors have been the recipients of most of the billions of dollars in venture philanthropy over the past decade – children, youth, and education.  As venture philanthropy expands into new sectors, the environment has become one of the biggest beneficiaries. How big is the venture philanthropy market? In Europe over €1 billion has been invested, 9 percent of which went towards environmental causes, according to the European Venture Philanthropy Association (EVPA).  In the U.S., exact figures are harder to come by but of the $225 billion of U.S. international philanthropy, it is estimated that about 10 to 20% is venture philanthropy.  Consider that the Bill and Melinda Gates Fund is valued at $30 billion and Warren Buffett has committed another $44 billion, and most of these funds will be managed using a business-like approach.  We can further estimate that at least 10% of these US funds are going towards the environment.

Not surprisingly, many of the nouveau riche have been at the forefront of VP over the past 10 years. They include names such as eBay’s Jeff Skoll, Alibaba.com’s Jack Ma, SOW Asia’s Darius Yuen, and technology serial entrepreneur Steve Kirsch. Like venture capitalists, venture philanthropists often get involved with helping with management, operations, and technology, and closely monitor performance.  “A recent survey of global C-suite executives revealed that 84% believe that society expects businesses to take a more active role in environmental, social, and political issues than it did five years ago,” writes Chuck Dietrech, CEO of SlideRocket on venture philanthropy in Forbes this week.

So where can you find green investments in the nonprofit and social investment sectors? Following are links to help you in your green venture philanthropy pursuits.

Sustainable Investment Forums (SIF)  –  One of the best places to plug into sustainable investments in a region is to join a regional SIF. Here is a list of Global SIFs.  The Africa sustainable investment forum Africasif.org, for example, is virtual so you can join from anywhere in the world. Members of SIFs receive market surveys and trends reports, and access to sustainable knowledge networks.

Foundation Centers – Globally, foundation centers are receiving a lot of support from venture philanthropy. To help its 2,000 members operate more efficiently, the China Foundation Center (CFC) has received venture philanthropy from some very largest VP funds, including the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the LGT Venture Philanthropy Fund, an investment fund of the Princely House of Liechtenstein.  However, while the CFC hosts Green foundations such as the China Green Carbon Foundation and China Environmental Protection Foundation, many foundation members will be too large to interest the venture philanthropist who wants a hands-on opportunity.

Social Enterprise Directories – ECSEL is leading the way in China with its directory of social enterprise projects, which lists projects by sector (5 environment-related) and location. ECSEL is a fellowship program sponsored by the Hong Kong-based Schoenfeld Foundation, a VP investing in the social, environmental and cleantech sectors. Ayllu’s iuMap is the largest global social directory map, and growing.  Backed by the world’s largest social enterprise funds, iuMap can be searched by category (energy, water, waste) or keyword.  It is an invaluable resource if you want to go shopping for social good projects.

Kiva.org – At Kiva, we like to look at what green technology entrepreneurs are up to.  There are many investments worth more than a few small loans. Take, for example, this promising concept by a Honduran entrepreneur – a waterless car wash.  An interesting green investment for a venture philanthropist who wants to help this young entrepreneur scale up.

Green Investment Associations – The Cleantech Network is one of the leading investment forums  for private equity investors focusing on the clean technology sector.  It provides comprehensive and up-to-date market intelligence through its i3 platform. The Cleantech.com blog has grown into a full-fledged clean technology investment information site and network. As part of its services, it forwards business plans from entrepreneurs directly to investor members.  It also maintains a database of incubators and angel networks.

There is a clear and strong trend towards venture philanthropists increasing their investments in the environment and cleantech sectors.  In Europe, after the key children, youth and education sectors, the environment is the fourth sector for more philanthropists. Liechenstein’s LGT Venture Philanthropy Fund is one of the few to also include cleantech and sustainable energies as key investment sectors. Germany’s Canopus Foundation and France’s PhiTrust also invest in the environment and cleantech.  While the Asian Venture Philanthropy Network lists 17 funds investing in the environment and cleantech sectors.

In the U.S., E + Co virtually invented venture philanthropy in cleantech almost two decades ago by leading private equity investments in water projects in developing countries.  We profile one of its board members Harish Hande in ecosociable.com this week. Hande is the entrepreneur who brought solar electrification to impoverished rural India.  If we can all find more Harish Handes, then our venture philanthropy will be a tremendous success.

GreatPoint Energy - US Concept Plant to Meet 0.5% of China's Energy Needs

 
This week, Silicon Valley’s largest venture capital fund, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, announced that its soon-to-be-launched fifteenth fund will focus on clean technologies, alongside technology and life science start-ups. The estimated size of the early stage fund is $650 million. KPCB is an exception, however, in the US venture capital market, traditionally a source of tremendous private financing largesse.  The traditional US venture capital route from Boston to Silicon Valley remains tight pursed for clean technology companies.  To raise money, clean energy start-ups need to think differently about how they access funding. Those who have both a global and local financing strategy are more likely to succeed.

As more clean technology financing shifts towards Asia, cleantech start-ups are acquiring expertise tapping the international financial markets . More progressive young companies are approaching Asian investors, according to the Wall Street Journal, reporting from a Department of Defense conference hosting hundreds of clean technology start-ups this week in Washington. China is now the largest investor in the $200 million alternative energy technology market, but opportunities are springing up across Asia.

Investors in energy hungry Asian countries are willing to consider pilot projects and commercialization ventures earlier than Western investors, and thereby assume more risk in early venture companies. Chinese industrial conglomerate China Wanxiang Holdings, for example, has  announced a $1.25 billion partnership with a Massachusetts-based maker of coal conversion technology, GreatPoint Energy. Together, they will build a plant to supply 0.5 percent of China’s energy needs by 2015. GreatPoint, which has received $150 million in funding to date, will also receive a $420 million equity investment.  In Indonesia, Jindal Steel and Power has  entered a joint venture agreement to commercialize New York-based Clean Coal Technologies Inc. (CCTI) plants, which convert coal into cleaner burning fuel.

Neither GreatPoint Energy nor CCTI were in the commercialization phase in the US market. CCTI is in the process of funding its first pilot project in Oklahoma. Their Asian investors see value in commercializing their technolgies in their markets today. The Chinese alone have invested over $6 billion in US companies over the last year. Gigaom.com has put together a list of 10 recent Chinese investments in cleantech.

Local funding is another growing source of financing for clean energy technology companies. Pennsylvania’s state funding vehicle Ben Franklin Technology Partners is a model for other states to follow.  Comprised of two state funds, the investment vehicle is seeking alternative energy companies in the Pennsylvania region whose technology will help meet the Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards. It is looking to invest between $10,000 and $750,000 in clean energy technologies.

Speaking at the DOE conference this week in Washington sponsored by ARPA-E (Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy), Bill Gates played the role of rabble rouser, trying to shake up more government investment in clean energy technologies. Following the failed $500 million investment in solar cell maker Solyndra, the US government is focusing on a more diversified portfolio of smaller companies creating innovative technologies.

The announcement of Kleiner’s new venture fund comes as Swiss-based Vontobel’s clean technology fund announces it is cutting back on renewable energy investments in favour of the smart grid, energy efficient motors and water sectors. Part of what we are seeing in the clean energy markets is a shakeout in a market saturated with solar and wind start-ups, and oversupply. Not unlike the technology boom’s love affair with Internet companies, the clean technology boom in recent years has had an infatuation with renewable energy technologies.  Investors such as Vontobel are now spreading their investments out across more clean technology sectors. Longer term, this diversification is healthy for the clean technology markets.

In this new marketplace, funding is no longer just about schmoozing for invitations to present on the clean technology financing conference circuit in front of a bunch of deep-pocketed VCs. The clean technology sector is working harder at not only applying for local funding but also lobbying local governments to invest aggressively in local clean technology companies and a sustainable economy.  Further widening their prospects, they are  bringing in international investment advisers who can open doors, not only to private equity but also to corporate venture capital and joint ventures.